Loading...
2011-01-31_Agenda Packet--Dossier de l'ordre du jourCity of Saint John Common Council Meeting Monday, January 31, 2011 Committee of the Whole 1. Call to Order 5:00 p.m. 8th Floor Boardroom City Hall 1.1a,b,c) Approval of Minutes 10.2(4) 1.2 Nominating Committee 10.2(4)(b) 1.3 Land Matter 10.2(4)(b) 1.4 Land Matter 10.2(4)(c,d) 1.5 Land Matter 10.2(4)(d) 1.6 Budget Deliberations 10.2(4)(c) Regular Meeting 1. Call to Order — Prayer 6:00 p.m. Council Chamber 2. Approval of Minutes 2.1 Minutes of January 4, 2011 2.2 Minutes of January 10, 2011 3. Adoption of Agenda 4. Disclosures of Conflict of Interest 5. Consent Agenda 5.1 Brentwood Park Holdings Inc. - Traffic Situation (Recommendation: Refer to Chief City Engineer) 5.2 Portage Atlantic Recovery Trail Project (Recommendation: Refer to Mayor) 5.3 Planning Advisory Committee Executive 2011 (Recommendation: Receive for Information) 5.4 Degrassi Letter: Snow Ban Alert System (Recommendation: Refer to City Solicitor) 5.5 Stop Up and Close Portions of Sandy Point Rd and Samuel Davis Dr (Recommendation in Report) 5.6 McGrath Letter: Presentation on Structural Soundness of Buildings on Midwood Avenue (Recommendation: Schedule for February 14, 2011) 5.7 Proposed Public Hearing Date 78 Orange Street and 1147 Loch Lomond Road (Recommendation in Report) 5.8 Design and Construction Management One Mile Lift Station Sanitary Forcemain Renewal (Recommendation in Report) 5.9 Design and Construction Management Lorneville Road Storm Drainage Crossing at Mill Creek (Recommendation in Report) 5.10 Amended Canada - New Brunswick Infrastructure Stimulus Fund Agreement & Extension Request (Recommendation in Report) 6. Members Comments 7. Proclamation 7.1 Heritage Week February 14 -21, 2011 and Heritage Day February 21, 2011 7.2 Heart Month - February 2011 8. Delegations/ Presentations 8.1 Safer Communities and Neighbourhoods (SCAN) 9. Public Hearings 7:00 p.m. 9.1(a) Request to Cancel Public Hearing for 1925 Bayside Dr 9.1(b) Proposed Zoning By -Law Amendment 1925 Bayside Dr 9.2(a) Proposed Section 39 Amendment 515 -519 Westmorland Rd (McAllister Place) 9.2(b) Planning Advisory Recommendation 10. Consideration of By -laws 10.1(a) Proposed Municipal Plan Amendment Sandy Point Rd 10.1(b) Letter of Support 10.1(c) Letters of Opposition 11. Submissions by Council Members 11.1 Bobby Hayes Day (Councillor Higgins) 11.2 External & Internal Communications Strategy for City of Saint John (Councillor Snook) 11.3 Legislative Power to Create City By Laws (Councillor Snook) 11.4 Vacant and Derelict Buildings Legislation (Councillor Snook) 11.5 Vacant & Derelict Building Legislation (Councillor McGuire) 11.6 The Development of an Integrated Neighbourhood Enhancement Initiative for Ocean West Way (Councillor McGuire) 11.7 Vacant and Derelict Buildings and the Fire Prevention Act (Councillor Snook) 11.8 Support for Analog TV Transmission (Councillor Sullivan) 12. Business Matters - Municipal Officers 12.1 City Solicitor: Overnight Winter Parking Restriction Amendment to Traffic By -Law (1 st and 2nd Reading) 12.2 City Solicitor: Loch Lomond Road Speed Limit Amendments to Traffic By- law (1 st and 2nd Reading) 12.3 City Solicitor: Traffic By -Law Amendment Duke Street West (1 st & 2nd Reading) 12.4 City Manager: Honeysuckle Drive - Relief Storm Sewer 12.5 City Manager: Kennebecasis Drive Culvert Replacement and Street Reconstruction 13. Committee Reports 13.0 Committee of the Whole: Agreement of Purchase and Sale 13.1 Taxation Review Committee: Status Update 13.2 Enterprise Saint John: Proposed Economic Development Task Force 13.3 Enterprise Saint John: Economic Development in Priority Neighbourhoods 13.4 a) Planning Advisory Committee: 425 Rothesay Avenue - Subdivision Application 13.4 b) City Manager Report: Land Acquisition - 425 Rothesay Avenue 13.5 Committee of the Whole: Thorne Avenue Lift Station 14. Consideration of Issues Separated from Consent Agenda 15. General Correspondence 15.1 Vincent Letter: Request to Present in Committee of the Whole Session 16. Adjournment City of Saint John Seance du conseil communal Le lundi 31 janvier 2011 Comit6 pl6nier 1.Ouverture de la seance 17 h — Salle de conference, 8e etage, h6tel de ville 1.1a,b,c) Approbation du proces- verbal — paragraphe 10.2(4) 1.2 Comite des candidatures — alin&a 10.2(4)b) 1.3 Question relative aux biens -fonds — alin6a 10.2(4)b) 1.4 Question relative aux biens -fonds — alin6as 10.2(4)c), d) 1.5 Question relative aux biens -fonds — alin6a 10.2(4)d) 1.6 D61ib6rations budg&taires — alin6a 10.2(4)c) Seance ordinaire 1. Ouverture de la seance, suivie de la priere 18 h — Salle du conseil 2. Approbation du proces- verbal 2.1 Proces- verbal de la s6ance tenue le 4 janvier 2011 2.2 Proces- verbal de la s6ance tenue le 10 janvier 2011 3. Adoption de 1'ordre du jour 4. Divulgations de conflits d'int6rets 5. Questions soumises a 1'approbation du conseil 5.1 Brentwood Park Holdings Inc. — Situation relative a la circulation (recommandation : transmettre a l'ing6nieur municipal en chef) 5.2 Le projet du « sentier de r6cup6ration » de Portage Atlantique (recommandation : transmettre au maire) 5.3 Comit& consultatif d'urbanisme — direction 2011 (recommandation : accepter a titre informatif) 5.4 Lettre de Degrassi au sujet du syst&me d'alerte dans le cadre de l'interdiction de stationnement en hiver (recommandation : transmettre a 1'avocat municipal) 5.5 Fermeture et barrage de trongons du chemin Sandy Point et de la promenade Samuel Davis (recommandation figurant au rapport) 5.6 Lettre de McGrath demandant a effectuer une pr6sentation portant sur la solidit6 structurale des batiments situ6s sur l'avenue Midwood (recommandation : fixer la date de la pr6sentation au 14 f&vrier 2011) 5.7 Date propos6e de la tenue d'une audience publique relativement au 78, rue Orange et au 1147, chemin Loch Lomond (recommandation figurant au rapport) 5.8 Gestion de la conception et de la construction relativement au renouvellement de la conduite de refoulement d'un mille (recommandation figurant au rapport) 5.9 Gestion de la conception et de la construction relativement a 1'ecoulement des eaux pluviales du chemin Lorneville au ruisseau Mill (recommandation figurant au rapport) 5.10 Demande visant a modifier 1'Entente Canada - Nouveau - Brunswick concernant le Fonds de stimulation de 1'infrastructure et sa prolongation (recommandation figurant au rapport) 6. Commentaires presentes par les membres 7. Proclamation 7.1 Semaine du patrimoine, du 14 au 21 fevrier 2011, et Fete du patrimoine le 21 fevrier 2011 7.2 Le mois du caeur — Fevrier 2011 8. Delegations et presentations 8.1 Securite dans les collectivites et les quartiers 9. Audiences publiques 19h 9.1a) Demande visant a annuler 1'audience publique relativement au 1925, promenade Bayside 9.1b) Projet de modification de 1'Arrete de zonage visant le 1925, promenade Bayside 9.2a) Projet de modification des conditions imposees par Particle 39 visant les 515 -519, chemin Westmorland (centre commercial McAllister Place) 9.2b) Recommandation du Comite consultatif d'urbanisme 10. Etude des arretes municipaux 10.1a) Modification proposee du plan municipal visant le chemin Sandy Point 10.1b) Lettre d'appui 10.1c) Lettre d'opposition 11. Interventions des membres du conseil 11.1 Journee Bobby Hayes (conseillere Higgins) 11.2 Strategies en matiere de communications internes et externes de The City of Saint John (conseiller Snook) 11.3 Pouvoir legislatif permettant d'elaborer des arretes municipaux (conseiller Snook) 11.4 Arrete concernant les batiments vacants et abandonnes (conseiller Snook) 11.5 Arrete concernant les batiments vacants et abandonnes (conseiller McGuire) 11.6 Mise en place d'une initiative visant le developpement integre de quartier de la voie Ocean West (conseiller McGuire) 11.7 Batiments vacants et abandonnes et la Loi sur la prevention des incendies (conseiller Snook) 11.8 Appui a 1'egard de la diffusion televisuelle analogique (conseiller Sullivan) 12. Affaires municipales evoquees par les fonctionnaires municipaux 12.1 Avocat municipal: Modification de l'arrete concernant la circulation dans le cadre des restrictions relatives au stationnement sur rue en hiver la nuit (premiere et deuxieme lectures) 12.2 Avocat municipal: Modifications a Parrete concernant la circulation dans le cadre de la limitation de vitesse sur le chemin Loch Lomond (premiere et deuxieme lectures) 12.3 Avocat municipal : Modification de Parrete concernant la circulation relativement a la rue Duke Ouest (premiere et deuxieme lecture) 12.4 Directeur general : Egout pluvial de secours de la promenade Honeysuckle 12.5 Directeur general : Remplacement des buses et travaux de refection sur la promenade Kennebecasis 13. Rapports deposes par les comites 13.0 Comite plenier : Convention d'achat -vente 13.1 Comite de revision de 1'imp6t foncier : Etat d'avancement 13.2 Enterprise Saint John : Projet relatif a la constitution d'un groupe de travail sur le developpement economique 13.3 Enterprise Saint John: Developpement economique dans les quartiers prioritaires 13.4a) Comite consultatif d'urbanisme : Demande d'amenagement de lotissement au 425, avenue Rothesay 13.4b) Rapport du Directeur general : Acquisition du terrain situe au 425, avenue Rothesay 13.5 Comite plenier : Station de relevement de Pavenue Thorne 14. Etude des sujets &art& des questions soumises a Papprobation du conseil 15. Correspondance generale 15.1 Lettre de Vincent: Demande en vue de faire une presentation devant le Comite plenier 16. Levee de la seance 96 -1 COMMON COUNCIL / CONSEIL COMMUNAL JANUARY 4, 201 VLE 4 JANVIER 2011 COMMON COUNCIL MEETING — THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN CITY HALL — JANUARY 4, 2011 — 6:15 P.M. Present: Ivan Court, Mayor Councillors Court, Farren, Higgins, McGuire, Mott, Norton, Snook, and Titus - and - P. Woods, City Manager; J. Nugent, City Solicitor; G. Yeomans, Commissioner of Finance and Treasurer; P. Groody, Commissioner of Municipal Operations; K. Forrest, Commissioner of Planning and Development; T. Leblanc, Police Staff Sergeant; M. Gillen, Deputy Fire Chief, B. Morrison, Commissioner of Leisure Services; E. Gormley, Common Clerk and J. Taylor, Assistant Common Clerk. SEANCE DU CONSEIL COMMUNAL DE THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN A L'HOTEL DE VILLE, LE 4 JANVIER 2011 a 18 H 15 Sont presents : Ivan Court, maire les conseillers Court, Farren, McGuire, Mott, Norton, Snook et la conseillere Higgins et P. Woods, directeur general; J. Nugent, avocat municipal; G. Yeomans, commissaire aux finances et tresorier; P. Groody, commissaire aux Operations municipales; K. Forrest, commissaire au service Urbanisme et developpement; T. Leblanc, sergent d'etat -major du Service de police; M. Gillen, chef adjoint du service d'incendie; B. Morrison, commissaire des Services des loisirs; ainsi que E. Gormley, greffiere communale, et J. Taylor, greffier communal adjoint. 1. Call To Order — Prayer Mayor Court called the meeting to order and Reverend Lindsay Burt offered the opening prayer. 1. Ouverture de la seance, suivie de la priere Le maire Court ouvre la seance et le reverend Lindsay Burt recite la priere d'ouverture. 2. Approval of Minutes On motion of Councillor Snook Seconded by Councillor McGuire RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting of Common Council, held on December 6, 2010 be approved. Question being taken, the motion was carried. 2. Approbation du proces- verbal Proposition du conseiller Snook Appuyee par le conseiller McGuire RESOLU que le proces- verbal de la seance du conseil communal tenue le 6 decembre 2010 soit approuve. A I'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. 96 -2 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL JANUARY 4, 201 VLE 4 JANVIER 2011 3. Approval of Agenda On motion of Councillor Titus Seconded by Councillor McGuire RESOLVED that the agenda of this meeting be approved. Question being taken, the motion was carried. 3. Adoption de I'ordre du jour soit adopte. Proposition du conseiller Titus Appuyee par le conseiller McGuire RESOLU que I'ordre du jour de la presente seance A I'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. 4. Disclosures of Conflict of Interest 4. Divulgations de conflits d'interets 5. Consent Agenda 5.1 That the report entitled Swearing -In of New Councillor, advising of the Oath of Office taken by Councillor Mel Norton on December 24th, 2010, be received for information. 5.2 That as recommended by the City Solicitor in the submitted report Insurance: Agent of Record, the December 6, 2010 resolution of Common Council appointing an Agent of Record for the City's insurance portfolio and accepting the associated premium costs for the City's 2011 insurance requirements be amended by deleting the words "Huestis Insurance Ltd." and the words "Huestis Insurance Limited" and substituting in each case the words "Huestis Commercial Insurance Ltd." 5.3 That as recommended by the City Manager in the submitted report M &C 2011- 003: Proposed Public Hearing Date, Common Council schedule the public hearings for the rezoning and Section 39 amendment applications of Anderson Architect Ltd. (515- 519 Westmorland Road), Apple Properties Ltd. (991 Fairville Boulevard) and Genivar Inc. (1925 Bayside Drive) for Monday, January 31, 2011 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber, and refer the applications to the Planning Advisory Committee for report and recommendation. 5.4 That as recommended by the City Manager in the submitted report M &C 2011- 004: Saint John Harbour Bridge Authority— Quit Claim Deed, The City of Saint John join in a Quit Claim Deed to the Saint John Harbour Bridge Authority for lands designated PID number 426163 and that the Mayor and Common Clerk execute the Quit Claim Deed. On motion of Councillor Titus Seconded by Councillor McGuire RESOLVED that the recommendation set out for each consent agenda item respectively be adopted. Question being taken, the motion was carried. 5. Questions soumises a I'approbation du conseil 5.1 Que le rapport intitule Assermentation dun nouveau conseiller, portant sur le serment que le conseiller Mel Norton a prete le 24 decembre 2010, soit accepte a titre d'information. 5.2 Que, comme le recommande I'avocat municipal dans le rapport soumis intitule Assurance : Agent rea /isateur, la resolution adoptee par le conseil communal le 6 decembre 2010 portant sur la nomination d'un agent realisateur pour le portefeuille d'assurances de la Ville et sur I'acceptation du cout des primes connexes pour les exigences relatives aux assurances de 2011 de la Ville, soit modifiee en remplagant 96 -3 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL JANUARY 4, 2011/LE 4 JANVIER 2011 « Huestis Insurance Ltd. » et « Huestis Insurance Limited » par « Huestis Commercial Insurance Ltd. ». 5.3 Que, comme le recommande le directeur general dans le rapport soumis intitule M/C 2011 -003 : Date proposee pour la tenue dune audience publique, le conseil communal fixe la date de I'audience publique relativement aux demandes de rezonage et de modification en vertu de I'article 39 soumises par Anderson Architect Ltd. (515 -519, chemin Westmorland), Apple Properties Ltd. (991, boulevard Fairville) et Genivar Inc. (1925, promenade Bayside) au lundi 31 janvier 2011, a 19 h, dans la salle du conseil, et qu'il transmette les demandes au Comite consultatif d'urbanisme aux fins de presentation de rapport et de recommandations. 5.4 Que, comme le recommande le directeur general dans le rapport soumis intitule M/C 2011 -004 : Administration du pont du port de Saint John, The City of Saint John joigne un acte de renonciation a I'Administration du pont du port de Saint John relativement aux terrains designes par le NID 426163, et que le maire et la greffiere communale signent I'acte de renonciation. Proposition du conseiller Titus Appuyee par le conseiller McGuire RESOLU que la recommandation formulee pour chacune des questions soumises a I'approbation du conseil soit adoptee. A I'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. 6. Members Comments Council members commented on various community events. 6. Commentaires presentes par les membres Les membres du conseil s'expriment sur diverses activites communautaires. 7. Proclamation 7. Proclamation 8. Delegations /Presentations 8.1 Saint John Transit: 2011 Budget Referring to a submitted presentation, Frank McCarey, General Manager of Saint John Transit, outlined the 2011 Saint John Transit budget and he responded to questions from Council members. 8. Delegations et presentations 8.1 Budget de 2011 de la Commission des transports de Saint John Faisant reference a une presentation anterieure, Frank McCarey, directeur general de la Commission des transports de Saint John, presente le budget de 2011 de la Commission des transports de Saint John, puis repond aux questions des membres du conseil. 9. Public Hearings 7:00 P.M. 9.1 Proposed By -Law Amendment Stop Up & Close Portion of Harding St West The Common Clerk advised that the necessary advertising was completed with regard to the proposed by -law amendment to stop -up and close a portion of Harding Street West, by adding thereto Section 215 immediately after Section 214 thereof, with no objections received. The Mayor called for members of the public to speak against the proposed amendment with no one presenting. 96 -4 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL JANUARY 4, 2011 /LE 4 JANVIER 2011 The Mayor called for members of the public to speak in favour of the proposed amendment with no one presenting. On motion of Councillor Farren Seconded by Councillor McGuire RESOLVED that the by -law entitled "A By -Law Respecting the Stopping Up and Closing of Highways in the City of Saint John" regarding a portion of Harding Street West by adding thereto Section 215 immediately after Section 214 thereof, be read a first time. Question being taken, the motion was carried. Read a first time by title, the by -law entitled "A By -Law Respecting the Stopping Up and Closing of Highways in The City of Saint John." On motion of Councillor Farren Seconded by Councillor McGuire RESOLVED that the by -law entitled "A By -Law Respecting the Stopping Up and Closing of Highways in the City of Saint John" regarding a portion of Harding Street West by adding thereto Section 215 immediately after Section 214 thereof, be read a second time. Question being taken, the motion was carried. Read a second time by title, the by -law entitled "A By -Law Respecting the Stopping Up and Closing of Highways in The City of Saint John." 9. Audiences publiques a 19 h 9.1 Projet de modification de I'Arrete concernant la fermeture et le barrage d'un trongon de la rue Harding Ouest La greffiere communale indique que les avis requis ont ete publies relativement au projet de modification de I'Arrete concernant la fermeture et le barrage de routes — trongon de la rue Harding Ouest et par l'ajout de I'article 215 a la suite de I'article 214, et qu'aucune opposition n'a ete reque. Le maire invite le public a exprimer son opposition quant a la modification proposee, mais personne ne prend la parole. Le maire invite le public a exprimer son appui quant a la modification proposee, mais personne ne prend la parole. Proposition du conseiller Farren Appuyee par le conseiller McGuire RESOLU que 1'arrete intitule « Arrete sur ('interruption de la circulation et la fermeture des routes dans The City of Saint John concernant un trongon de la rue Harding Ouest par l'ajout de I'article 216 a la suite de I'article 214, fasse ('objet d'une premiere lecture. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. Premiere lecture par titre de 1'arrete intitule « Arrete sur ('interruption de la circulation et la fermeture des routes dans The City of Saint John ». Proposition du conseiller Farren Appuyee par le conseiller McGuire RESOLU que 1'arrete intitule « Arrete sur ('interruption de la circulation et la fermeture des routes dans The City of Saint John concernant un trongon de la rue Harding Ouest par l'ajout de I'article 216 a la suite de I'article 214, fasse ('objet d'une deuxieme lecture. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. Deuxieme lecture par titre de 1'arrete intitule « Arrete sur ('interruption de la circulation et la fermeture des routes dans The City of Saint John ». 96 -5 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL JANUARY 4, 2011/LE 4 JANVIER 2011 10. Consideration of By -laws 10.1 Third Reading Proposed Water and Sewerage By -Law Amendment Regarding Fees (Councillor Norton withdrew from the meeting) On motion of Councillor Snook Seconded by Councillor McGuire RESOLVED that the by -law entitled "A By -Law to Amend a By -Law Respecting Water and Sewerage" be read. Question being taken, the motion was carried. The by -law entitled "A By -law to Amend a By -Law Respecting Water and Sewerage" was read in its entirety. On motion of Councillor Snook Seconded by Councillor Farren RESOLVED that the by -law entitled "A By -Law to Amend a By -Law Respecting Water and Sewerage" 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 "A By -Law to Amend a By -Law Respecting Water and Sewerage." 10. Etude des arretes municipaux 10.1 Troisieme lecture du projet de modification de I'Arrete concernant les frais de reseaux d'eau et d'egouts (Le conseiller Norton quitte la seance.) Proposition du conseiller Snook Appuyee par le conseiller McGuire RESOLU que 1'arrete intitule « Arrete modifiant 1'arrete concernant les reseaux d'eau et d'egouts » fasse ('objet d'une lecture. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. L'arrete intitule « Arrete modifiant 1'arrete concernant les reseaux d'eau et d'egouts » est lu integralement. Proposition du conseiller Snook Appuyee par le conseiller Farren RESOLU que 1'arrete intitule « Arrete modifiant 1'arrete concernant les reseaux d'eau et d'egouts » fasse ('objet d'une troisieme lecture, que ledit arrete soit edicte et que le sceau communal y soit appose. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. Troisieme lecture de 1'arrete intitule « Arrete modifiant 1'arrete concernant les reseaux d'eau et d'egouts ». 10.2 Third Reading Street Closing — Portion of St. James Street (The Mayor withdrew from the meeting and Councillor Titus replaced him as the Chair) On motion of Councillor Snook Seconded by Councillor McGuire 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 St. James Street, be read. 96 -6 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL JANUARY 4, 201 VLE 4 JANVIER 2011 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 Snook 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 Saint James 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 ". (The Mayor reentered the meeting replacing Councillor Titus as the Chair) 10.2 Troisieme lecture de I'arrete concernant la fermeture d'un tron(;on de la rue St. James (Le maire quitte la seance et le conseiller Titus le remplace a titre de president.) Proposition du conseiller Snook Appuyee par le conseiller McGuire RESOLU que 1'arrete intitule « Arrete no M -23, Arrete modifiant I'Arrete sur ('interruption de la circulation et la fermeture des routes dans The City of Saint John )) relativement a la rue St. James, fasse ('objet d'une premiere lecture. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. L'arrete intitule « Arrete no M -23, Arrete modifiant I'Arrete sur ('interruption de la circulation et la fermeture des routes dans The City of Saint John » est lu integralement. Proposition du conseiller Snook Appuyee par le conseiller Farren RESOLU que 1'arrete intitule « Arrete no M -23, Arrete modifiant I'Arrete sur ('interruption de la circulation et la fermeture des routes dans The City of Saint John », relativement a la rue St. James, fasse ('objet d'une troisieme lecture, qu'il soit edicte et que le sceau communal y soit appose. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. Troisieme lecture par titre de 1'arrete intitule « Arrete no M -23, Arrete modifiant I'Arrete sur ('interruption de la circulation et la fermeture des routes dans The City of Saint John ». (Le maire se joint de nouveau a la seance et remplace le conseiller Titus a titre de president.) 10.3(a)Third Reading Zoning By -law Amendment — 142 Harrington Street 10.3(b)Section 39 Conditions On motion of Councillor Snook Seconded by Councillor McGuire RESOLVED that the by -law entitled "By -law Number CP 110 -165, A Law to Amend the Zoning By -Law of The City of Saint John" re- zoning a parcel of land located at 142 Harrington Street having an area of approximately 690 Square metres, also identified as PID number 00371518, from "RM -IF" Multiple Residential Infill to "B -1" Local Business classification, be read. Question being taken, the motion was carried. 96 -7 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL JANUARY 4, 2011 /LE 4 JANVIER 2011 The by -law entitled "By -law Number CP 110 -165, 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 Farren RESOLVED that, pursuant to the provisions of Section 39 of the Community Planning Act, the proposed development of a parcel of land located at 142 Harrington Street having an area of approximately 690 square metres, also identified as PID number 00371518 be subject to the following conditions: (a) That the use of the site be limited to a business office and dwelling units; (b) That the parking area in the rear of the site be developed in accordance with the detailed plan prepared by the developer and subject to the approval of the Development Officer, detailing the layout of the parking area and landscaping and showing a minimum of four parking spaces; (c) That the developer pave all access, maneuvering and parking areas with asphalt and that paved areas be enclosed with continuous cast -in -place concrete curbs where necessary to protect landscaped areas and to facilitate proper drainage; and (d) That the developer provide a detailed stormwater and site drainage plan and report, subject to the approval of the Chief City Engineer or his designate, indicating how storm water collection and disposal will be handled. Question being taken, the motion was carried. On motion of Councillor Titus Seconded by Councillor McGuire RESOLVED that the by -law entitled "By -law Number CP 110 -165, A Law to Amend the Zoning By -Law of The City of Saint John ", re- zoning a parcel of land located at 142 Harrington Street having an area of approximately 690 square metres, also identified as PID number 00371518, from "RM -IF" Multiple Residential Infill to "B -1" Local 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 CP 110 -165, A Law to Amend the Zoning By -Law of The City of Saint John ". 10.3a) Troisibme lecture de la modification de I'arrete de zonage visant le 142, rue Harrington 10.3b) Conditions imposees par I'article 39 Proposition du conseiller Snook Appuyee par le conseiller McGuire RESOLU que 1'arrete intitule « Arrete no C.P. 110 -165 modifiant I'Arrete de zonage de The City of Saint John » modifiant le zonage d'une parcelle de terrain d'une superficie approximative de 690 metres carres, situee au 142, rue Harrington et portant le NID 00371518, en vue de faire passer la classification de zone d'edification de logements multiples sur terrain intercalaire « RM -IF » a zone commerciale locale « B -1 », fasse ('objet d'une lecture. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. L'arrete intitule « Arrete no C.P. 110 -165 modifiant I'Arrete de zonage de The City of Saint John » est lu integralement. Proposition du conseiller Titus Appuyee par le conseiller Farren RESOLU qu'en vertu des dispositions prevues a I'article 39 de la Loi sur 1'urbanisme, I'amenagement propose de la parcelle de terrain situee au 142, rue Harrington, d'une superficie d'environ 690 metres carres et inscrite sous le NID 00371518, soit assujetti aux conditions suivantes : 10 96 -8 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL JANUARY 4, 2011 /LE 4 JANVIER 2011 (a) que ('usage du site se limite a un bureau commercial et a des logements; (b) que I'aire de stationnement situee a I'arriere du site soit amenagee conformement au plan de situation detaille, prepare par le promoteur et sujet a I'approbation de I'agent d'amenagement, indiquant la disposition de I'aire de stationnement, les espaces paysagers et au moins quatre places de stationnement; (c) que le promoteur asphalte toutes les aires d'acces, de manoeuvre et de stationnement, et que les aires asphaltees soient entourees de bordures continues de beton coulees sur place au besoin pour proteger les espaces paysagers et pour faciliter le drainage; (d) que le promoteur fournisse un plan et un rapport de drainage et de situation detailles des eaux de ruissellement, sous reserve de I'approbation de I'ingenieur municipal en chef ou de son representant, indiquant le mode prevu de collecte et de repartition des eaux pluviales sur les lieux. A I'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. Proposition du conseiller Titus Appuyee par le conseiller McGuire RESOLU que I'arrete intitule « Arrete no C.P. 110 -165 modifiant I'Arrete de zonage de The City of Saint John » modifiant le zonage d'une parcelle de terrain d'une superficie approximative de 690 metres carres, situee au 142, rue Harrington et portant le NID 00371518, en vue de faire passer la classification de zone d'edification de logements multiples sur terrain intercalaire o RM -IF » a zone commerciale locale « B -1 », fasse ('objet d'une troisieme lecture, que ledit arrete soit edicte et que le sceau communal y soit appose. A I'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. Troisieme lecture par titre de I'arrete intitule « Arrete no 110 -165 modifiant I'Arrete de zonage de The City of Saint John ». 10.4(a)Third Reading Zoning By -law Amendment — 237 -249 Mount Pleasant Ave 10.4(b)Section 39 Conditions On motion of Councillor Farren Seconded by Councillor Titus RESOLVED that the by -law entitled "By -law Number CP 110 -166, A Law to Amend the Zoning By -Law of The City of Saint John ", re- zoning a parcel of land located at 237 -249 Mount Pleasant Avenue having an area of approximately 1950 square metres, also identified as PID numbers 55143119, 00418608, 00418590, 55080386 and 00429050, from "R -2" One and Two Family Residential to "IL -1" Neighbourhood Institutional classification, be read. Question being taken, the motion was carried. The by -law entitled "By -law Number CP 110 -166 A Law to Amend the Zoning By -law of The City of Saint John ", was read in its entirety. On motion of CouncillorTitus Seconded by Councillor Farren RESOLVED that, pursuant to the provisions of Section 39 of the Community Planning Act, the proposed development of a parcel of land located at 237 -249 Mount Pleasant Avenue having an area of approximately 1950 square metres, also identified as PID numbers 55143119, 00418608, 00418590, 55080386 and 00429050 be subject to the following conditions: (a) That the developer provide a detailed stormwater and site drainage plan and report, subject to the approval of the Chief City Engineer or his designate, indicating how storm water collection and disposal will be handled; (b) That the developer pave all access, maneuvering and parking areas with asphalt and that paved areas be enclosed with continuous cast -in -place concrete curbs where necessary to protect landscaped areas and to facilitate proper drainage; 11 96 -9 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL JANUARY 4, 2011 /LE 4 JANVIER 2011 (c) That development of the site be in accordance with a detailed site plan, prepared by the developer and subject to the approval of the Development Officer, and the Chief City Engineer or his designate, illustrating the location of all buildings, structures, parking areas, driveways, landscaping and other site features; (d) That the developer agrees to negotiate in good faith for the acquisition of the parcel of land required to correct the existing encroachment of City infrastructure onto the site; and (e) That the approved site plan be attached to any building permit application for the development and that the site improvements shown on the approved site plan be completed to the satisfaction of the Development Officer within one (1) year from the issuance of a building permit for the particular building. Question being taken, the motion was carried. On motion of Councillor Titus Seconded by Councillor Farren RESOLVED that the by -law entitled "By -law Number CP 110 -166, A Law to Amend the Zoning By -Law of The City of Saint John ", re- zoning a parcel of land located at 237 -249 Mount Pleasant Avenue having an area of approximately 1950 square metres, also identified as PID numbers 55143119, 00418608, 00418590, 55080386 and 00429050, from "R -2" One and Two Family Residential to "IL -1" Neighbourhood Institutional 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 CP 110 -166, A Law to Amend the Zoning By -Law of The City of Saint John ". 10.4a) Troisibme lecture de la modification de I'Arrete de zonage visant les 237 -249, avenue Mount Pleasant 10.4b) Conditions imposees par I'article 39 Proposition du conseiller Farren Appuyee par le conseiller Titus RESOLU que I'arrete intitule « Arrete no C.P. 110 -166 modifiant I'Arrete de zonage de The City of Saint John », modifiant le zonage d'une parcelle de terrain d'une superficie d'environ 1 950 metres carres situee au 237 -249, avenue Mount Pleasant, et portant les NID 55143119, 00418608, 00418590, 55080386 et 00429050, afin de la faire passer de zone residentielle — habitations unifamiliales et bifamiliales « R -2 » a zone de quartier a vocation collective IL -1 », fasse ('objet d'une lecture. A I'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. L'arrete intitule « Arrete no C.P. 110 -166 modifiant I'Arrete de zonage de The City of Saint John » est lu integralement. Proposition du conseiller Titus Appuyee par le conseiller Farren RESOLU qu'en vertu des dispositions prevues a I'article 39 de la Loi sur 1'urbanisme, I'amenagement propose de la parcelle de terrain d'une superficie d'environ 1 950 metres carres situee au 237 -249, avenue Mount Pleasant, et portant les NID 55143119, 00418608, 00418590, 55080386 et 00429050, soit assujetti aux conditions suivantes : (a) que le promoteur fournisse un plan et un rapport de drainage et de situation detailles des eaux de ruissellement, sous reserve de I'approbation de I'ingenieur municipal en chef ou de son representant, indiquant le mode prevu de collecte et de repartition des eaux de ruissellement sur les lieux; (b) que le promoteur asphalte toutes les aires d'acces, de manoeuvre et de stationnement, et que les aires asphaltees soient entourees de bordures continues de beton coulees sur place au besoin pour proteger les espaces paysagers et pour faciliter le drainage; 12 96 -10 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL JANUARY 4, 2011 /LE 4 JANVIER 2011 (c) que I'amenagement de 1'emplacement soit conforme au plan de situation detaille, prepare par le promoteur et sujet a I'approbation de I'agent d'amenagement et de l'ingenieur municipal ou de son remplagant, indiquant 1'emplacement de tous les batiments et de toutes les constructions, les aires de stationnement, les voies d'acces, les espaces paysagers et les autres caracteristiques de 1'emplacement; (d) que le promoteur convienne de negocier de bonne foi en vue de I'acquisition de la parcelle de terrain necessaire pour corriger 1'empietement existant de ('infrastructure municipale sur le site; (e) que le plan de situation approuve soit joint a toute demande de permis de construction relative au projet d'amenagement et que les travaux d'amelioration indiques sur les plans de situation approuves soient termines, a la satisfaction de I'agent d'amenagement, dans un delai d'un (1) an a compter de la date de delivrance du permis de construction pour le batiment en question. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. Proposition du conseiller Titus Appuyee par le conseiller Farren RESOLU que 1'arrete intitule « Arrete no C.P. 110 -166 modifiant I'Arrete de zonage de The City of Saint John », modifiant le zonage d'une parcelle de terrain d'une superficie d'environ 1 950 metres carres situee au 237 -249, avenue Mount Pleasant, et portant les NID 55143119, 00418608, 00418590, 55080386 et 00429050, afin de la faire passer de zone residentielle — habitations unifamiliales et bifamiliales « R -2 » a zone de quartier a vocation collective « IL -1 », fasse ('objet d'une troisieme lecture, que ledit arrete soit edicte et que le sceau communal y soit appose. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. Troisieme lecture par titre de 1'arrete intitule « Arrete no 110 -166 modifiant I'Arrete de zonage de The City of Saint John ». 10.5 Third Reading Zoning By -Law Amendment — 6 Highwood Drive On motion of Councillor Snook Seconded by Councillor Farren RESOLVED that the by -law entitled "By -law Number CP 110 -168, A Law to Amend the Zoning By -Law of The City of Saint John ", re- zoning a parcel of land located at 6 Highwood Drive having an area of approximately 1000 square metres, also identified as PID number 00020131, from "R -1A" One Family Residential to "R -2" One and Two Family Residential, be read. Question being taken, the motion was carried. The by -law entitled "By -law Number CP 110 -168 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 Snook RESOLVED that the by -law entitled "By -law Number CP 110 -168, A Law to Amend the Zoning By -Law of The City of Saint John ", re- zoning a parcel of land located at 6 Highwood Drive having an area of approximately 1000 square metres, also identified as PID number 00020131, from "R -1A" One Family Residential to "R -2" One and Two Family Residential, 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 CP 110 -168, A Law to Amend the Zoning By -Law of The City of Saint John ". (Councillor Norton reentered the meeting) 13 96 -11 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL JANUARY 4, 2011/LE 4 JANVIER 2011 10.5 Troisieme lecture de la modification de I'Arrete de zonage visant le 6, promenade Highwood Proposition du conseiller Snook Appuyee par le conseiller Farren RESOLLI que 1'arrete intitule « Arrete no C.P. 110 -168 modifiant I'Arrete de zonage de The City of Saint John » visant a modifier le zonage d'une parcelle de terrain d'une superficie d'environ 1 000 metres carres situee au 6, promenade Highwood, et portant le NID 00020131, pour la faire passer de zone residentielle - habitations unifamiliales « R -1A» a zone residentielle - habitations unifamiliales et bifamiliales « R -2 », fasse ('objet d'une lecture. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. L'arrete intitule « Arrete no C.P. 110 -168 modifiant I'Arrete de zonage de The City of Saint John » est lu integralement. Proposition du conseiller Titus Appuyee par le conseiller Snook RESOLLI que 1'arrete intitule « Arrete no C.P. 110 -168 modifiant I'Arrete de zonage de The City of Saint John » visant a modifier le zonage d'une parcelle de terrain d'une superficie d'environ 1 000 metres carres situee au 6, promenade Highwood, et portant le NID 00020131, pour la faire passer de zone residentielle - habitations unifamiliales « R -1A » a zone residentielle — habitations unifamiliales et bifamiliales « R -2 », fasse ('objet d'une troisieme lecture, que ledit arrete soit edicte et que le sceau communal y soit appose. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. Troisieme lecture par titre de I'arrete intitule « Arrete no 110 -168 modifiant I'Arrete de zonage de The City of Saint John ». (Le conseiller Norton se joint de nouveau a la seance.) 11. Submissions by Council Members 11.1 Private Member's Bill for Pension Plan Reform (Councillor Sullivan) On motion of Councillor Farren Seconded by Councillor Mott RESOLVED that Mayor Court, on behalf of Common Council, formally ask MLA Carl Killen to bring forward the required legislative changes to reform the Pension Plan of The City of Saint John. Question being taken, the motion was carried. 11. Interventions des membres du conseil 11.1 Projet de loi emanant d'un depute concernant la reforme du regime de retraite (conseiller Sullivan) Proposition du conseiller Farren Appuyee par le conseiller Mott RESOLLI que le maire Court, au nom du conseil communal, demande formellement a Carl Killen, depute, de presenter les modifications legislatives exigees pour proceder a la reforme du regime de retraite de The City of Saint John. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. 14 96 -12 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL JANUARY 4, 201 VLE 4 JANVIER 2011 11.2 Scheduling of Additional Ward Meeting (Councillor Snook) On motion of Councillor Snook Seconded by Councillor McGuire RESOLVED that the City Manager consult with Ward Councillors and schedule additional Ward meetings where deemed necessary and appropriate. Question being taken, the motion was carried. 11.2 Etablissement d'un calendrier pour une reunion de quartier supplementaire (conseiller Snook) Proposition du conseiller Snook Appuyee par le conseiller McGuire RESOLU que le directeur general consulte les conseillers des quartiers et qu'il organise des reunions de quartier supplementaires s'il le juge necessaire et pertinent. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. 11.3 Safer Communities and Neighbourhood Task Force (Councillor Snook) On motion of Councillor Snook Seconded by Councillor McGuire RESOLVED that the City Manager place contact information with regard to the SCAN Task Force on the home page of the City of Saint John's website and, in consultation with the SCAN Task Force, explore other effective ways to promote and distribute information about how a citizen can use this new and valuable resource; and further, that the Clerk be directed to invite the SCAN Task Force to appear before Council to make a presentation. Question being taken, the motion was carried. 11.3 Groupe de travail sur la securite dans les collectivites et les quartiers (conseiller Snook) Proposition du conseiller Snook Appuyee par le conseiller McGuire RESOLU que le directeur general affiche les coordonnees du groupe de travail sur « les voisinages et les communautes plus securitaires » sur la page d'accueil du site Web de The City of Saint John et, en consultation avec ce groupe de travail, qu'il etudie d'autres moyens efficaces de promouvoir et de distribuer ('information sur la fagon dont les citoyens peuvent utiliser cette ressource nouvelle et precieuse; en outre, que la greffiere soit chargee d'inviter le groupe de travail « sur les voisinages et les communautes plus securitaires » a faire une presentation devant le conseil. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. 11.4 Rainbow Park Update (Councillor Snook) The Commissioner of Leisure Services advised that the new skating surface at Rainbow Park will open next week. He further advised that the splash pad is complete, noting that it will be tested in the Spring of 2011. On motion of Councillor Snook Seconded by Councillor McGuire RESOLVED that the verbal update provided by the Commissioner of Leisure Services be received for information. Question being taken, the motion was carried. 15 96 -13 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL JANUARY 4, 201 VLE 4 JANVIER 2011 11.4 Mise a jour relative au parc Rainbow (conseiller Snook) Le commissaire des Services des loisirs indique que la nouvelle patinoire du parc Rainbow doit ouvrir la semaine suivante. II indique egalement que la fontaine a jets douchants est terminee et qu'elle sera testee au printemps 2011. Proposition du conseiller Snook Appuyee par le conseiller McGuire RESOLU que la mise a jour verbale presentee par le commissaire aux Services des loisirs soit acceptee a titre d'information. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. 11.5 Community Centre Partnerships (Councillor Snook) On motion of Councillor Snook Seconded by Councillor McGuire RESOLVED that the City Manager explore the feasibility of creating an "After Hours" PALS program support model for the City of Saint John's Community Centres in order to ensure that children and youth have an increased level of mentorship, support, and recreational opportunities. The goal is to ensure there are sustainable and enhanced programs in our community centres through the establishment of creative partnerships with local businesses. Question being taken, the motion was carried. 11.5 Partenariats de centre communautaire (conseiller Snook) Proposition du conseiller Snook Appuyee par le conseiller McGuire RESOLU que le directeur general etudie la faisabilite de creer un modele de soutien au programme PALS (partenaires aidant les ecoles locales) apres les heures de bureau pour les centres communautaires de The City of Saint John, afin que les enfants et les jeunes aient acces a plus de services de mentorat, de soutien et de possibilites de loisirs. Le but est de s'assurer que nos centres communautaires offrent des programmes durables et ameliores en etablissant des partenariats creatifs avec les entreprises locales. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. 12. Business Matters - Municipal Officers 12.1 City Manager: Community Centres Programming Kevin Watson, Recreation Manager, appeared before Council and outlined the recommendation appearing in the submitted report and he responded to questions from Council members. On motion of Councillor McGuire Seconded by Councillor Titus RESOLVED that: 1) Common Council approve a grant in the amount of $49,000 for the YMCA to provide programs and services at the Forest Glen Community Centre for the period of January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2011 as per the original terms and conditions as set forth in the 2006 agreement; 2) The YMCA will provide free drop -in programs as per the submitted proposal; 3) The City Solicitor be directed to prepare all necessary documents; and 4) The Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to sign any required contract documents. Question being taken, the motion was carried. 16 96 -14 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL JANUARY 4, 201 VLE 4 JANVIER 2011 12. Affaires municipales evoquees par les fonctionnaires municipaux 12.1 Directeur general : Programmes des centres communautaires Kevin Watson, directeur des loisirs, se presente devant le conseil pour donner un aperpu des recommandations contenues dans le rapport et repondre aux questions des membres du conseil. Proposition du conseiller McGuire Appuyee par le conseiller Titus RESOLU que: 1) le conseil communal approuve une subvention de 49 000 $ pour permettre au YMCA d'offrir des programmes et des services au centre communautaire Forest Glen, pour la periode du 1,r janvier au 31 decembre 2011, conformement aux modalites et aux conditions stipulees dans 1'entente de 2006; 2) le YMCA offrira des programmes de halte - garderie gratuits conformement a la proposition soumise; 3) l'avocat municipal soit charge de rediger toute documentation exigee; 4) le maire et la greffiere communale soient autorises a signer toute documentation contractuelle exigee. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. 12.2 City Manager: Pipeline Crossing Agreement with Maritimes & Northeast Pipeline — Crossing KP 98 On motion of Councillor Farren Seconded by Councillor Mott RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager in the submitted report M &C 2011 -05: Pipeline Crossing Agreement with Maritimes & Northeast Pipeline — Crossing KP 98, The City of Saint John enter into a Crossing Consent Agreement with Maritimes & Northeast Pipeline Limited Partnership, by its General Partner Maritimes and Northeast Pipeline Management Ltd. / Maritimes & Northeast Pipeline subject to the terms and conditions in the submitted agreement, for the purposes of facilitating the force main installation as part of the Harbour Clean Up Project and that the Mayor and Common Clerk execute the said agreement. Question being taken, the motion was carried. 12.2 Directeur general : Convention relative au franchissement du gazoduc conclue avec la societe Maritimes and Northeast Pipeline Management Ltd. — croisement du gazoduc 98 Proposition du conseiller Farren Appuyee par le conseiller Mott RESOLU que, comme le recommande le directeur general dans le rapport soumis intitule M/C 2011-05: Convention entre la municipalite et la societe Maritimes and Northeast Pipeline, The City of Saint John conclue une convention de consentement de croisement avec Maritimes and Northeast Pipeline Limited Partnership, par 1'entremise de son associee commanditee, Maritimes and Northeast Pipeline Management Ltd. /Maritimes and Northeast Pipeline, sous reserve des modalites prevues a la convention presentee, afin de faciliter ('installation de la conduite principale dans le cadre du projet de nettoyage du port, et que le maire et la greffiere communale signent ladite convention. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. 13. Committee Reports 13. Rapports deposes par les comites 14. Consideration of Issues Separated from Consent Agenda 14. Etude des sujets ecartes des questions soumises a I'approbation du conseil 17 96 -15 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL JANUARY 4, 2011/LE 4 JANVIER 2011 15. General Correspondence 15. Correspondance generale 16. Adjournment The Mayor declared the meeting adjourned at 8:10 p.m. 16. Levee de la seance Le maire declare que la seance est levee a 20 h 10. Mayor/ maire Common Clerk / greffiere communale 18 96 -16 COMMON COUNCIL / CONSEIL COMMUNAL JANUARY 10, 2011/ LE 10 JANVIER 2011 COMMON COUNCIL MEETING — THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN CITY HALL — JANUARY 10, 2011 — 5:00 P.M. Present: Ivan Court, Mayor Deputy Mayor Chase and Councillors Court, Farren, Higgins, McGuire, Mott, Norton, Snook, Sullivan, and Titus - and - P. Woods, City Manager; J. Nugent, City Solicitor; G. Yeomans, Commissioner of Finance and Treasurer; P. Groody, Commissioner of Municipal Operations; A. Poffenroth, Deputy Commissioner of Buildings and Inspection Services; B. Morrison, Commissioner of Leisure Services; R. Simonds, Fire Chief; E. Gormley, Common Clerk and J. Taylor, Assistant Common Clerk. SEANCE DU CONSEIL COMMUNAL DE THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN A L'HOTEL DE VILLE, LE 10 JANVIER 2011 A 17 H Sont presents : Ivan Court, maire le maire suppleant Chase et les conseillers Court, Farren, McGuire, Mott, Norton, Snook, Sullivan, Titus et la conseillere Higgins et P. Woods, directeur general; J. Nugent, avocat municipal; G. Yeomans, commissaire aux finances et tresorier; P. Groody, commissaire aux Operations municipales; A. Poffenroth, commissaire adjoint aux Services d'inspection et des batiments; B. Morrison, commissaire des Services des loisirs; R. Simonds, chef du service d'incendie; ainsi que E. Gormley, greffiere communale, et J. Taylor, greffier communal adjoint. 3. Approval of Agenda On motion of Councillor Snook Seconded by Councillor McGuire RESOLVED that the agenda of this meeting, with the addition of item 3.4 Land Matter 10.2(4)(c,d) to the Committee of the Whole Closed session agenda, be approved. Question being taken, the motion was carried. 3. Adoption de I'ordre du jour Proposition du conseiller Snook Appuyee par le conseiller McGuire RESOLU que I'ordre du jour de la presente reunion soit adopte, moyennant I'ajout du point 3.4, Question relative aux biens -fonds — alineas 10.2(4)c), d), a I'ordre du jour de la seance privee du comite plenier. A I'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. 3.1 City Manager: Emergency Purchase of Used Fire Apparatus On motion of Councillor Snook Seconded by Councillor McGuire RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, Council authorize the Purchasing Agent to complete the negotiations with the Anderson Township for the purchase of their 1997 Rosenbauer, 109 foot aerial on an as is / where is basis for the purchase price of $150,000.00 in U.S. funds and further that Council authorize the expenditure of the funds necessary to purchase this apparatus and to put it into service with the Saint John Fire Department. 19 96 -17 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL JANUARY 10, 201 VLE 10 JANVIER 2011 Responding to a question from Council, the Fire Chief stated that the fire apparatus would be primarily used as a reserve unit. Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor Farren voting nay. 3.1 Directeur general : Achat en urgence d'un engin d'incendie usage Proposition du conseiller Snook Appuyee par le conseiller McGuire RESOLU que, comme le recommande le directeur general, le conseil autorise I'agent d'achat a conclure les negociations avec Anderson Township pour I'achat de son carrion incendie de marque Rosenbauer, annee 1997, avec echelle de 109 pieds (33 metres), a 1'etat dans lequel it se trouve, pour la somme de 150 000 $ US. II est en outre resolu que le conseil autorise les depenses necessaires a I'achat de ce carrion et a sa mise en service pour le Service d'incendie de Saint John. En reponse a une question posee par le conseil, le chef du service d'incendie precise que 1'engin d'incendie servirait principalement en cas de besoin. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. Le conseiller Farren vote contre la proposition. 3.2 Leisure Services Proposed 2011 Budget Referring to a submitted presentation, K. Watson, Recreation Manger, outlined the proposed 2011 budget for recreation programming and neighbourhood improvement. T. DeSaulniers, P.R.O. Kids Manager, provided background information on the City's P.R.O. Kids program and she outlined the proposed 2011 budget. The Commissioner of Leisure Services outlined the proposed 2011 budget for Parks & City Landscape Services. M. Hugenholtz, Manager of Sport & Recreation Facilities, outlined the proposed 2011 budget for the Sport & Recreation Facilities Service and he presented the proposed 2011 capital budget. On motion of Councillor Titus Seconded by Councillor McGuire RESOLVED that Leisure Services Proposed 2011 Budget be received for information. Question being taken, the motion was carried. 3.2 Budget de 2011 propose pour les Services des loisirs Faisant reference a une presentation anterieure, K. Watson, directeur des loisirs, presente le budget de 2011 propose pour les programmes de loisirs et I'amelioration des quartiers. T. DeSaulniers, directrice de P.R.O. Kids, fournit des renseignements generaux sur le programme de la Ville pour P.R.O. Kids et elle presente le budget de 2011 propose. Le commissaire des Services des loisirs presente le budget de 2011 propose pour le Service d'amenagement paysager des pares et de la ville. M. Hugenholtz, directeur du Service d'installation de sports et de loisirs, presente le budget de 2011 propose pour son service, ainsi que le budget d'immobilisations propose pour 2011. Proposition du conseiller Titus Appuyee par le conseiller McGuire RESOLU que le bilan de 2011 propose pour les Services des loisirs, soit accepte a titre informatif. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. 20 96 -18 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL JANUARY 10, 2011/ LE 10 JANVIER 2011 3.3 2011 General Fund Operating Budget Discussions Referring to a submitted report, the City Manager outlined the proposed 2011 revenue and expenditures for The City of Saint John, the decision matrix, the proposed budget framework, the summary of the City's committed expenditures, and the history of the City's tax rate over the last 20 years. Mr. Woods noted that the operating budget should be a reflection of the collective will of Council, advising that Council will be required to make difficult decisions as the current service demands exceed the available resources. Mr. Woods outlined the submitted budget materials, advising that he requires specific direction from Council with respect to the 2011 operating budget. Responding to comments from Council members, Mr. Woods stated that a stable tax rate with declining revenue is not sustainable over the long term, noting that service levels would eventually decrease. Responding to a question with respect to the pension funding shortfall, Mr. Woods stated that the City has a valid and reasonable case in its request for legislative and regulatory pension relief from the Province of New Brunswick, noting that the problem took a decade to develop and that it will take decades to resolve. He advised that the City would be taking a calculated risk to assume that it will receive relief, adding that the City would be in a deficit situation in 2011 if relief is not available. On motion of Deputy Mayor Chase Seconded by Mayor Court RESOLVED that the City Manager be directed to prepare the 2011 General Fund Operating Budget with a tax rate of $1.785 per $100 of assessment, assuming that legislative and regulatory pension relief is made available to The City of Saint John. Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor Higgins voting nay. On motion of Deputy Mayor Chase Seconded by Councillor Titus RESOLVED that the City Manager be directed to prepare a "Plan B" should the legislative and regulatory pension relief not be made available to The City of Saint John. Question being taken, the motion was carried. Mr. Woods explained that the "Plan B" would take a number of months to develop. On motion of Deputy Mayor Chase Seconded by Councillor Farren RESOLVED that the City Manager be directed to contact Saint John Energy representatives to enquire whether Saint John Energy can absorb all, or a portion, of the city's street lighting expenses. Question being taken, the motion was carried. On motion of Councillor Court Seconded by Councillor Titus RESOLVED that Council send a letter to School District 8 to enquire whether the field at Forrest Hills School will be made available to The City of Saint John in 2011 for organized soccer matches. Question being taken, the motion was carried. 21 96 -19 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL JANUARY 10, 201 VLE 10 JANVIER 2011 3.3 Discussions a propos du budget de fonctionnement du fonds d'administration de 2011 Se reportant a un rapport depose anterieurement, le directeur general presente le budget propose des recettes et des depenses pour The City of Saint John en 2011, la matrice de decision, le cadre budgetaire propose, le resume des depenses engagees par la Ville, et 1'historique du taux d'imposition de la Ville depuis les 20 dernieres annees. M. Woods fait remarquer que le budget de fonctionnement doit refleter la volonte de 1'ensemble du conseil. En outre, it precise que ce dernier devra prendre des decisions difficiles etant donne que le niveau actuel de la demande de services depasse celui des ressources disponibles. M. Woods presente la documentation budgetaire soumise, soulignant qu'il demande au conseil de fournir une orientation precise concernant le budget de fonctionnement de 2011. En reponse aux commentaires adresses par les membres du conseil, M. Woods declare qu'un taux d'imposition stable associe a des recettes en baisse ne constitue pas une solution viable a long terme et que les niveaux de service finiraient par diminuer. Pour repondre a la question qui lui est posee relativement au financement deficitaire de la caisse de retraite, M. Woods precise que la Ville a des arguments valables et raisonnables pour demander a la province du Nouveau - Brunswick d'octroyer un allegement des mesures legislatives et reglementaires sur les pensions. De plus, it souligne qu'il a fallu 10 annees avant que le probleme ne se pose et qu'il faudra plusieurs decennies pour le resoudre. II declare que la Ville pendrait un risque mesure en s'attendant a recevoir cet allegement et que, si ce n'etait pas le cas, elle se retrouverait alors en deficit. Proposition du maire suppleant Chase Appuyee par le maire Court RESOLU que le directeur general soit charge de preparer le budget de fonctionnement du fonds d'administration de 2011 avec un taux d'imposition de 1,785 $ par tranche de 100 $ d'evaluation, et ce, sur la base du principe selon lequel The City of Saint John beneficierait d'un allegement des mesures legislatives et reglementaires sur les pensions. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. La conseillere Higgins vote contre la proposition. Proposition du maire suppleant Chase Appuyee par le conseiller Titus RESOLU que le directeur general soit charge de mettre sur pied un plan de rechange dans le cas ou I'allegement des mesures legislatives et reglementaires sur les pensions ne serait pas accorde a The City of Saint John. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. M. Woods explique qu'il faudrait plusieurs mois pour concevoir ce plan de rechange. Proposition du maire suppleant Chase Appuyee par le conseiller Farren RESOLU que le directeur general soit charge de communiquer avec les representants de la societe Saint John Energy afin de savoir si cette derniere pourrait absorber, tout ou partie, des depenses de la Ville relativement a 1'eclairage des rues. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. Proposition du conseiller Court Appuyee par le conseiller Titus RESOLU que le conseil fasse parvenir une lettre au district scolaire 8 dans laquelle it lui demande si The City of Saint John pourra disposer du terrain de 1'ecole Forest Hills en 2011 pour y organiser des rencontres de soccer. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. 22 96 -20 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL JANUARY 10, 2011/ LE 10 JANVIER 2011 16. Adjournment The Mayor declared the meeting adjourned at 9:15 p.m. 16. Levee de la seance Le maire declare que la seance est levee a 21 h 15. Mayor/ maire Common Clerk / greffiere communale 23 �5 ,1 Brentwood Park Holdings Inc. January 10, 2011 Mayor and Council City of Saint John Saint John, NB Dear Sirs and Madam, Over the past few months, we, the residents of Brentwood Crescent, have become increasingly aware of a potentially dangerous situation that has been developing in our subdivision. There has been increased traffic using the crescent as a turn- around route for easy access to Woodward Avenue. Much of this traffic is in the form of light trucks and vans, looking for addresses in the general area, for deliveries or job sites for home renovations. Since we are a residential street, several families have young children who often play on or near the roadway. We, the residents, are very concerned for their safety. Our residents are, as one would expect, familiar with the neighbourhood and exercise care and caution but the increased unfamiliar traffic presents potential for a tragic situation. On behalf of the residents, the Board of Directors would ask that you, the Mayor and Council, consider posting signage indicating children playing. In addition, we feel that the installation of speed reducing bumps would be helpful in controlling this dangerous situation. We appreciate your consideration of this request and thank you in advance for your time and understanding. Yours truly, Board of Directors Brentwood Park Holdings Inc. �President, Shirley Richard 72 Brentwood Crescent, Saint John, NB E2K 4R4 24 MVk Freedom from Addition Vaincre la toxicomanie Portage Atlantic Box 1041, Station A Fredericton, NB E3B 5C2 Tel.: 506.472.4847 Fax: 506.455.5236 www.portage.ca January 24, 2011 Attn: Mayor Ivan Court and Council Portage Atlantique City of Saint John B. P. 1041, succ.: A P.O. Box 1971 Fredericton, NB E3B 5C2 Telephone : 506.472.4847 Saint John, NB E2L 41-1 Telecopieur : 506.455.5236 www.portaoe.ca Subiect: Portage Atlantic Recovery Trail Project Dear Mayor and Council: Portage Atlantic is a non -profit organization dedicated to improving the lives of at -risk youth and their families throughout our communities. Since 1996, this has been achieved through Portage's residential addictions rehabilitation centre for youth. At the picturesque Cassidy Lake treatment centre, over 1,500 youth between the ages of 14 and 21 have received help for serious dependencies to drugs and alcohol. Portage Atlantic is blessed with its many supporters, including the Future Focus Foundation ( www.futurefocusfoundation.com). The Future Focus Foundation is dedicated to helping children succeed and advancing human achievement. In keeping with this mission Future Focus has endeavoured to help raise funds for the Recovery Trail Project at Cassidy Lake. This project involves developing a trail system on the 165 acres of lakeshore property at Cassidy Lake to encourage outdoor activity for youth in treatment. With lifelong benefits such as team building, enhanced self - confidence and development of problem- solving skills, physical activity is an integral part of the Portage program. The Recovery Trail will foster an appreciation for, and enjoyment of, the natural environment at Cassidy Lake, while boosting physical activity levels and inviting the introduction of future outdoor adventure programs. Funds for the Recovery Trail are being raised through the Stride for Success charity relay portion of the Run Through History: A Celebration of Green Space event. Teams of 8 from various organizations are signing up to help raise funds and participate in the relay this July, 2011. Portage Atlantic and Future Focus are asking Mayor and Council to consider endorsing and participating in this event. A "City of Saint John" team made up of employees would be a terrific addition to the charity relay and a welcome encouragement of our efforts. I thank you in advance for your time and consideration. For further details I invite you to contact me at (506) 459 -1284 or ctracey(o) portage. ca. Carol Trace DA • ac Director of Corporate Development ��� • ���F Charitable organization registration number: 1 291 5- 1 0072- RR0001 9d ao Accredited -Agree Num6ro d'enregistrement de I'organisme de charity 12915- 10072- RR0001 25 January 31, 2011 Your Worship and Councillors: SUBJECT: Planning Advisory Committee Executive 2011 The Planning Advisory Committee Rules of Procedure provide for the election of an executive on a yearly basis. The Committee, at its January 18, 2011 meeting, elected the following individuals as members of the executive for the year 2011: Chairman Colin Murray Vice - Chairman Erik Kraglund Third Executive Member Eric Falkjar RECOMMENDATION: That this report be received and filed. Respectfully submitted, Colin Murray Chairman W Dear Sirs or Madams of the Common Council: I am writing this letter in regards to the Snow Ban that was declared on Sunday, January 23, 2011. I feel that because of the glitch in the e-mail alert system, that caused many of us to not receive the Snow Ban alert, the subsequent parking tickets and towing charges should be waived and refunded. I believe that there are many valid reasons why this should be done. The Snow Ban webpage on the Parking section of the Saint John website states that "a temporary overnight parking ban can be declared from I 1 p.m. to 7 a.m. on the evening after each significant snow storm ". The snowstorm we had to prompt this Snow Ban occurred on Friday, January 21. According to that statement, a Snow Ban should have been declared on the evening of Saturday, January 22. There was also a significant snowstorm during the day on Wednesday, January 12. However, a Snow Ban was not declared on the evening of Thursday, January 13. The inconsistencies in the Snow Ban declarations do not prepare citizens for an actual Snow Ban, and give no reason for citizens to believe there would be a Snow Ban on Sunday night. I am a student and when I am not at school, I am usually at work, and in both environments I have no normal access to a television or radio. Because of this, I rely on the e-mail service provided by the city to receive alerts regarding Snow Bans. This service is especially helpful when there is no reason to think there would be a Snow Ban, like on Sunday. So when a service like this is offered, and the public trusts this service, then it fails to deliver, a problem presents itself. I am aware now, after speaking with someone from the City's Solicitor's Office, that according to the bylaw, the city is only obligated to announce parking bans via radio and television. However, many people do not know this is the case. I have tried to find this bylaw online, but I have had no luck. It is not easily accessible to anyone that wishes to find it. The sign up page on the city's website for the e -mail service does not state that it is just a "courtesy ". It does not say anything to the fact that the city is only obligated to announce a ban via radio or television. Some of the main priorities of this council is to make Saint John a city where people will want to live, and to have "citizens /ratepayers consistently recognize municipal services as being effective at a supportable cost." I do not find this Snow Ban policy as being an effective service in today's technology driven society, where e-mail has become almost a necessity. Being a student who just moved here from Ontario, I had a good first impression of the city, finding it to be friendly and pleasant. However, this current policy regarding Snow Bans, and the way I was treated by the Parking Commission, is something I find to be very inhospitable. I do hope something can be done about this situation, as I know many people are upset. The best thing that could be done for us, the citizens of Saint John, would be having the parking tickets and towing fees waived and refunded. I thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Natalie Degrassi 80 Princess Street Apt 3 506 977 371 1 27 REPORT TO COMMON COUNCIL M & C — 2011 -24 January 28, 2011 His Worship Mayor Ivan Court and Members of Common Council Your Worship and Councillors: SUBJECT: STOP -UP AND CLOSE PORTIONS OF SANDY POINT ROAD AND SAMUEL DAVIS DRIVE BACKGROUND: City of Saint John Common Council at its November 22, 2010 meeting considered and adopted the recommendations contained in a report from the City Manager (M & C 2010 -381) to proceed with actions as detailed in a report from ADI with respect to the Sandy Point Road Planning Study. One of the adopted recommendations directed the initiation of amendments to the Municipal Plan and the Zoning By -law for a number of City owned parcels (or portions thereof). The required advertisement for the first step in the Municipal Plan amendment process has been completed and the date for the submission of comments by the general public as part of this stage of the process has concluded. The Common Clerk's office will be submitting a report to Common Council for its Monday, January 31St, 2011 meeting to consider the referral of this application to the Planning Advisory Committee for its report and recommendation and to set a Public Hearing date for Council to consider this application on Monday, March 14, 2011. Forming part of the subject areas to be considered for the Municipal Plan Amendment and Rezoning, are two portions of public street right -of -ways that are not required for street purposes, one having an approximate area of 4,000 square metres ± of a public street known as Sandy Point Road, as identified as Parcel #1 on an attached sketch; and the other, having an approximate area of 650 square metres ± of a public street known as portions of Sandy Point Road and Samuel Davis Drive, as identified as Parcel #2 on an attached sketch. These pieces of right of way must be properly closed and staff would suggest that it is most appropriate for Common Council to hold the Public Hearings for the street closures at the same meeting as the public hearings for the plan amendment and rezoning applications. As part of the public notification process for the street closures, staff intends to have a survey plan prepared indicating the specific areas to be considered for street closures. W M & C-2011-24 - 2 - January 27, 2011 Municipal Operations have been made aware of these possible street closures and do not have any concerns with the specific areas. The following recommendation will facilitate the street closure process and also set the Public Hearing date to be considered at the same meeting as that for the Municipal Plan Amendment and Rezoning application. RECOMMENDATION: That the Public Hearing for the consideration of the passing of a By -law to Stop Up and Close two portions of public streets; one having an approximate area of 4,000 square metres ± of a public street known as Sandy Point Road, identified as Parcel #1 on the attached sketch; and the other having an approximate area of 650 square metres ± of a public street known as portions of Sandy Point Road/Samuel Davis Drive, identified as Parcel #2 on the attached sketch, be set for Monday, March 14, 2011 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber, and 2. That Common Council authorize the publishing of a notice of the intention to consider passing of such By -law. Respectfully submitted, Ken Forrest, MCIP, RPP Commissioner Planning and Development I Patrick Woods, C.G.A. City Manager CL /c Attachments W b M ,m Parcel #1 M1 M1 • e b • • K „ � b 4 0� a i r rQ�• b leldsto11��7$ape q M b q •� ~ � �1373e407 sss oQI.T, sssss, ays °s ch. San .° d p0jMt Rd, a pp uee �+ 7� h m A . O W em 4 c CY ry CO Ch 40 N w °5 Subject Area m, 0) OS9 Cb Os� / O h O tm �a O 0 ti 0 o`c S 78? Q r aA a� \ T% Description of Plan: Illustrate area of undeveloped street right -of -way for possible stop up and closure. N PID: N/A Address: Portion of Unused Sandy Point Road Pan: N/A Date: January 27, 2011 30 31 Via Hand Delivery MAYOR & COUNCIL City of Saint John 16 Market Square PO Box 1971 Saint John, NB E2L 41 Dear Sirs: January 26, 2011 Re: Presentation to Common Council This is to advise I wish to address the Common Council pursuant to s.1o.1 of the Procedural Bylaw. The purpose of my request is to make a presentation to council concerning the decision of the Saint John Substandards Properties Appeal Committee. I will specifically address the structural soundness of the various structures on my property at 32 Midwood Avenue. It is probable that to deal effectively with the structural soundness issue I will require more time than the next council meeting of January 31, and as a result I would ask at the next eligible council meeting. As a result I would ask that you confirm my request as soon as possible. Yours very truly, �/?' Xc Rodney McGrath 32 REPORT TO COMMON COUNCIL M &C- 2011 -18 January 25, 2011 His Worship Mayor Ivan Court and Members of Common Council Your Worship and Councillors: SUBJECT: Proposed Public Hearing Date 78 Orange Street and 1147 Loch Lomond Road BACKGROUND: As provided in Common Council's resolution of August 3, 2004, this report indicates the rezoning and Section 39 amendment applications received and recommends an appropriate public hearing date. Details of the applications are available in the Common Clerk's office and will form part of the documentation presented at the public hearings. The following applications have been received. City of Saint John Name of Location Existing Proposed Reason Applicant Zone Zone Gordon 78 Orange Street "B -1" "RM -IF" To recognize an Hewitt existing one - family dwelling Columbian 1147 Loch Lomond "RS -2" Charities Road Council 6595 (2004) Inc. RECOMMENDATION: 11RM -1" To permit a three storey, 42 -unit apartment building That Common Council schedule the public hearings for the rezoning applications of Gordon Hewitt (78 Orange Street) and Columbian Charities Council 6595 33 M & C-2011 — 18 - 2 - January 25, 2011 (2004) Inc. (1147 Loch Lomond Road) for Monday, February 28, 2011 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber, and refer the applications to the Planning Advisory Committee for report and recommendation. Respectfully submitted, Ken Forrest, MCIP, RPP Commissioner Planning and Development J. Patrick Woods, CGA City Manager 34 REPORT TO COMMON COUNCIL M &C2011 -21 January 26, 2011 His Worship Mayor Ivan Court and Members of Common Council Your Worship and Members of Council: 71r � I The City of Saint john SUBJECT: Design and Construction Management: One Mile Lift Station Sanitary Forcemain Renewal BACKGROUND The approved 2011 Water & Sewerage Utility Fund Capital Program includes design and construction management funding for the renewal of a section of sanitary forcemain between the One Mile Lift Station and the Marsh Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant. The forcemain is in poor condition and it is important that the design work proceed now. This project includes funding necessary to engage engineering design and construction management services to complete the following: Site surveys, preliminary investigation and data collection; Preliminary design, cost estimates and design report; Conduct public consultation; Detailed design and specifications preparation; Construction management and inspection services; and Record drawings in digital and hard copy format. PURPOSE The purpose of this report is to make a recommendation for consulting engineering services for this project. 35 M &C2011 -21 January 26, 2011 Page 2 ANALYSIS On December 2, 2010 with a comprehensive and detailed scope of work document developed by staff, a proposal for consulting engineering services was requested from Crandall Engineering Limited. In response to this request, Crandall Engineering Limited submitted a proposal on January 6, 2011. Staff was previously authorized to conduct negotiations with this consultant for engineering services for the One Mile Lift Station Sanitary Forcemain Renewal. A Review Committee consisting of the following staff completed an analysis of the submission: Brian Keenan, P.Eng. Engineering Manager, Municipal Engineering David Russell, P.Eng. Municipal Engineer, Municipal Engineering Kendall Mason, P.Eng. Municipal Engineer, Municipal Engineering David Logan, CPPB Purchasing Agent/Manager, Materials and Fleet Management Each member completed an independent review of the submission and, subsequently, a Review Committee meeting was held to jointly discuss the information presented in the Crandall Engineering Limited proposal. The price contained in the proposal was also evaluated by the Committee and staff negotiated with Crandall Engineering Limited and settled on an acceptable consultant's fee to submit to Council for approval. The submission from Crandall Engineering Limited met all of the requirements of the request for proposal in a manner acceptable to the Committee, with a cost effective bid for the project. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The proposed cost of the work for Crandall Engineering Limited to provide design and construction management services is $124,625.29 including the City's eligible HST rebate based on an estimated 8 week construction management period. An amount of $250,000 was included for design and construction management in the 2011 Water & Sewerage Utility Fund Capital Program. Engineering fees to cover the cost of design and construction management generally range between 12 -17% of the total overall project cost, depending on the nature of the project and the engineering services required. This upset fee is approximately 15.4% of the total overall project cost, which is considered appropriate for this type of project. 36 M &C2011 -21 January 26, 2011 Page 3 POLICY — ENGAGEMENT OF ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS Notwithstanding the City's Procurement Policy for engagement of Professional Services, Common Council has authorized staff with the approval of M &C 2010 -350 to conduct negotiations for the engagement of an engineering consultant for this project. The costs incurred by the consultant will be paid in accordance with the terms of the Request For Proposal at the rates submitted and accepted in the consultants proposal not to exceed the Recommended Minimum Hourly Rates as contained in The Association of Consulting Engineering Companies — New Brunswick fee guideline. The Construction Management component of this project fee is based on an estimated construction period. The final fee will be calculated based on the actual construction management period. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the proposal from Crandall Engineering Limited for engineering services (design and construction management) for the One Mile Lift Station Sanitary Forcemain Renewal, 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. Commissioner Municipal Operations & Engineering J. Patrick Woods, CGA City Manager 37 REPORT TO COMMON COUNCIL M &C2011 -22 January 26, 2011 His Worship Mayor Ivan Court and Members of Common Council Your Worship and Members of Council: 71r � I The City of Saint john SUBJECT: Design and Construction Management: Lorneville Road Storm Drainage Crossing at Mill Creek BACKGROUND A continuing project from the 2010 General Fund Capital Program includes funding for design work associated with the reconstruction of the existing storm drainage crossing at Mill Creek. The remainder of the project funding for construction and construction management will be proposed in the 2012 General Fund Capital Program. This project is not scheduled for construction until 2012 to allow sufficient time for design work to be completed prior to seeking environmental approvals which may include an environmental assessment. This project includes funding necessary to engage engineering design and construction management services to complete the following: Site surveys, preliminary investigation and data collection; Preliminary design, cost estimates and design report; Conduct public consultation; Detailed design and specifications preparation; Construction management and inspection services; and Record drawings in digital and hard copy format. PURPOSE The purpose of this report is to make a recommendation for consulting engineering services for this project. 38 M &C2011 -22 January 26, 2011 Page 2 ANALYSIS On November 15, 2010 with a comprehensive and detailed scope of work document developed by staff, a proposal for consulting engineering services was requested from GENIVAR Inc. In response to this request, GENIVAR Inc. submitted a proposal on November 29, 2010. Staff was previously authorized to conduct negotiations with this consultant for engineering services for the Lorneville Road Storm Drainage Crossing at Mill Creek. A Review Committee consisting of the following staff completed an analysis of the submission: Brian Keenan, P.Eng. Engineering Manager, Municipal Engineering David Russell, P.Eng. Municipal Engineer, Municipal Engineering John Campbell, P.Eng. Municipal Engineer, Municipal Engineering David Logan, CPPB Purchasing Agent/Manager, Materials and Fleet Management Each member completed an independent review of the submission and, subsequently, a Review Committee meeting was held to jointly discuss the information presented in the GENIVAR Inc. proposal. The price contained in the proposal was also evaluated by the Committee and staff negotiated with GENIVAR Inc. and settled on an acceptable consultant's fee to submit to Council for approval. The submission from GENIVAR Inc. met all of the requirements of the request for proposal in a manner acceptable to the Committee, with a cost effective bid for the project. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The proposed cost of the work for GENIVAR Inc. to provide design and construction management services is $117,707.30 including the City's eligible HST rebate based on an estimated 7 week construction management period. An amount of $60,000 is currently available from a continuing project from the 2010 General Fund Capital Program. Staff will only authorize GENIVAR Inc. to proceed with the design component of the project at this time at a cost of approximately $55,700. The remainder of the project funding for construction and construction management will be proposed in the 2012 General Fund Capital Program. Engineering fees to cover the cost of design and construction management generally range between 12 -17% of the total overall project cost, depending on the nature of the project and the engineering services required. This upset fee is approximately 16.2% of the total overall project cost, which is considered appropriate for this type of project. 39 M &C2011 -22 January 26, 2011 Page 3 POLICY — ENGAGEMENT OF ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS Notwithstanding the City's Procurement Policy for engagement of Professional Services, Common Council has authorized staff with the approval of M &C 2010 -360 to conduct negotiations for the engagement of an engineering consultant for this project. The costs incurred by the Consultant will be paid in accordance with the terms of the Request For Proposal at the rates submitted and accepted in the consultants proposal not to exceed the Recommended Minimum Hourly Rates as contained in The Association of Consulting Engineering Companies — New Brunswick fee guideline. The Construction Management component of this project fee is based on an estimated construction period. The final fee will be calculated based on the actual construction management period. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the proposal from GENIVAR Inc. for engineering services (design and construction management) for the Lorneville Road Storm Drainage Crossing at Mill Creek, 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. Commissioner Municipal Operations & Engineering J. Patrick Woods, CGA City Manager 40 REPORT TO COMMON COUNCIL M &C2011 -16 January 27, 2011 His Worship Mayor Ivan Court and Members of Common Council Your Worship and Members of Council, The City of Saint john SUBJECT: Amended Canada - New Brunswick Infrastructure Stimulus Fund Agreement & Extension Request PURPOSE The purpose of this report is to place before Common Council the Amended Canada - New Brunswick Infrastructure Stimulus Fund Agreement ( "Agreement ") relating to projects within the Safe Clean Drinking Water Program as well as Asphalt Pavement Projects and to seek authorization for the Mayor and Common Clerk to execute the appropriate documentation. Secondly the purpose is to request an extension for a minor portion of one project; East Phinney Hill Transmission Mains which will require some spring restoration work. BACKGROUND Under the Infrastructure Stimulus Fund (ISF) Guidelines, application was made for support through the Government of Canada's Economic Action Plan. The intention of the fund was to rehabilitate existing assets and construct new infrastructure that could be completed by March 31, 2011. Through much hard work, Saint John is in the enviable position that it will substantially complete all of its stimulus projects by March 31St, 2011 (despite deadline extension to October 31, 2011). The initial public announcement for award of the funding was made in August 2009 to announce that all six projects that had been submitted for consideration under the Infrastructure Stimulus Fund Program had been approved for funding support. One of the projects listed in the Program — Reversing Falls Bridge Project could not proceed for a number of reasons (M &C 2010 -131). In addition, some projects had been competitive and the financial results positive; therefore an additional request was put forth to the Regional Development Corporation (RDC) in early June 2010 in an attempt to make effective use of the funding committed to by the ISF partners. 41 M &C 2011 - 16 Amended Canada — NB Infrastructure Stimulus Fund Agreement & Extension Request January 27, 2011 Page 2 Amended Agreement RDC has acted as the delivery agent for the Agreement on behalf of both the Government of Canada and the Province of New Brunswick. They have provided invaluable support and guidance to the City of Saint John. Supplementary infrastructure projects were proposed and approval sought. Projects put forth for consideration were projects that could be completed by March 31, 2011 and would not otherwise have been completed. The projects were intended to offset the Reversing Falls Bridge project and take advantage of some competitive tendering. The three additional following projects received approval. 1. Spruce Lake Industrial Park Watermain ($900,000) - The project generally consists of installing 981m of new 250mm watermain along King William Road and Water Tower Road to service the Spruce Lake Industrial Park replacing the existing 900mm diameter watermain currently in service. 2. Cottage Hill & Rockwood Water Storage Reservoirs ($600,000) — This project consists of the rehabilitation and re- coating of existing water storage reservoirs. 3. Asphalt Pavements ($3,751,876) — Resurface with new asphalt; approximately 40.6 lane kilometers of road surface to extend the life of the various local road assets. A fourth project — "Water Use Efficiency and Meter Renewal" with an estimated cost of $800,000 did not receive approval. Extension Request On December 2, 2010, the Government of Canada announced a one -time extension to the construction deadline for infrastructure projects under its Economic Action Plan and subsequent extension of the Canada — New Brunswick Infrastructure Stimulus Fund Agreement (ISF). The March 31, 2011 deadline has been extended to October 31, 2011. This extension allows ISF recipients to complete projects currently underway. For Saint John there are in total 8 ISF projects; all of which will be substantially completed by March 31, 2011. However, one project — East Phinney Hill Transmission Mains will require some spring restoration and hence the request for a minor extension on that one project. 42 M &C 2011 - 16 Amended Canada — NB Infrastructure Stimulus Fund Agreement & Extension Request January 27, 2011 Page 3 ANALYSIS Amended Agreement The total estimated value of the three additional projects approved amounted to $5,251,876. The revised contribution approved at 66.67% of the total eligible costs up to a maximum of $15,465,335. This contribution represents both the federal and provincial funding share. Amendment #1 to the Canada -New Brunswick Infrastructure Stimulus Fund Agreement ( "Agreement ") supports projects within the Safe Clean Drinking Water Program as well as Asphalt Pavement Projects. The covering letter requests that the amended agreement be signed and returned to the Regional Development Corporation. Extension Request There is a formal process to request a project extension. One of the criteria that must be met is that there be a specific Council resolution, the wording of which is provided by the other levels of Government (see attached). The resolution commits the City to finish the project and accept responsibility for any costs incurred beyond October 31, 2011. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that Common Council accept the terms and conditions of Amendment #1: Canada -New Brunswick Infrastructure Stimulus Fund Agreement ( "Agreement ") relating to the Safe Clean Drinking Water and Asphalt Pavement Projects and authorize the Mayor and Common Clerk to execute appropriate documentation in that regard. Secondly, it is recommended that Common Council resolve to request an extension for the East Phinney Hill Transmission Mains Project by using the attached supplied motion. Respectfully submitted, J.M. Paul Groody, P.Eng. Commissioner, Municipal Operations Encls 43 J. Patrick Woods, CGA City Manager MOTION TO REOUEST AN EXTENSION FOR INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS UNDER CANADA'S ECONOMIC ACTION PLAN Moved by Seconded by WHEREAS the federal and provincial governments will make a one -time extension of the deadline for funding of projects under the Infrastructure Stimulus Fund and the Building Canada Fund — Communities Top -Up from March 31, 2011 to October 31, 2011; AND WHEREAS all funding from the Government of Canada and the Province will cease after October 31, 2011; AND WHEREAS the City of Saint John has asked the provincial government for an extension to Federal and Province funding to October 31, 2011 for the following projects: Project number Project title Total eligible cost Federal contribution 9270.005 East Phinney Hill Transmission Mains $6,200,000 $2,066,667 THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the City of Saint John attests that it will continue to contribute its share of the required funding for the aforementioned projects; AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT actual claims for all eligible costs incurred by March 31, 2011, for the aforementioned projects must be and will be submitted no later than April 30, 2011 to the Province; AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the City of Saint John will ensure that the project will be completed. Tn New Nouveau io-)Tun,svw C A N A D A July 29, 2010 His Worship Ivan Court Mayor of Saint John City Hall 15 Market Square PO Box 1971 Saint John NB E2L 4L1 Dear Mr. Mayor: SUBJECT: Amendment #1: Canada — New Brunswick Infrastructure Stimulus Fund Projects Project: 9270.005: Citv of Saint John - Action Plan for Safe, Clean Drinking Water Project: 9270.012: Citv of Saint John - Asphalt Projects Project: 9270.013: City of Saint John - Spruce Like and Cottage Hill / Rockwood Proiects I am pleased to advise you that your request for an amendment to the City of Saint John — Action Plan for Safe, Clean Drinking Water projects previously approved under the Canada — New Brunswick Infrastructure Stimulus Fund Agreement ( "Agreement ") has been considered and projects have been amended or approved as per Schedule A. The revised contribution has been approved at 66.667% of the total eligible project costs up to a maximum of $15,463,335 ( "Contribution ") in favor of the City of Saint John ( "Applicant "). The Contribution represents both the federal and provincial funding share as detailed in Schedule A. The assistance is intended to support core components of the Action Plan for Safe, Clean Drinking Water as well as a number of asphalt pavement projects. Accordingly, this offer replaces the original letter of offer dated August 17, 2009. The Regional Development Corporation ( "RDC ") will act as the delivery agent for the Agreement on behalf of the Government of Canada ( "Canada ") and the Province of New Brunswick. This contract is subject to the Agreement dated July 3, 2009 and any subsequent amendments to the Agreement. In the event of a conflict between the clauses herein and the Agreement, the latter shall prevail. Regional Development Corporation / Societe de developpement regional www.gnb.ca P.O. Box /C.P. 428 Fredericton New Brunswick /Nouveau- Brunswick E313 5114 Canada Tel./T61.(506)453-2277 fax /Tel @c. (506) 453 -7988 L i His Worship Ivan Court July 29, 2010 Page 2 Details of the Offer of Financial Assistance: 1. As $342,836 of the project budget was expended in fiscal year 2009 -2010, the remaining $15,120,499 will be provided in the 2010 -2011 fiscal year (April 1— March 31). 2. The Applicant agrees that funds shall be used solely for eligible costs outlined in Schedule B for the project as listed in Schedule A of this letter. 3. The Applicant shall be responsible for contributing 33.333 %, or $7,731,666 of the eligible project costs tinder this contract as detailed in Schedule A. 4. For projects #1 to #5 as outlined in Schedule A, any costs incurred prior to AII-USt 17, 2009 are not considered eligible expenses under this offer. 5. For projects #6 to #9 as outlined in Schedule A, any costs incurred prior to July 29, 2010 are not considered eligible expenses under this offer. 6. In accordance with the terms and conditions of the Agreement, all eligible costs must be incurred by March 31, 2011. 7. The current offer is based on the Infrastructure Stimulus Fund Guidelines and is consequently subordinate to all its conditions. (http: / /www. building canada- cliantierscanada .gc.ca/creating- creation /isf- fsi- guide- ene.html ) Reimbursement Procedures: 1. Payments will be made upon receipt and verification of progress claims submitted by the Applicant. Any claims for reimbursement by the Applicant must be supported by copies of invoices and proof of payment of those invoices. Each claim for payment shall be submitted on forms herein provided, as per Schedule C. Progress claims shall be submitted at minimum quarterly. 2. Upon approval of submitted claims, RDC will reimburse the Applicant for 66.667% of the total claim. 3. All claims for eligible costs incurred up to December 31, 2010 must be submitted no later than January 15, 2011. 4. All requests for final payments must be made no later than April 8, 2011. Any claims received after this date will not be eligible for reimbursement. 46 His Worship Ivan Court July 29, 2010 Page 3 Terms and Conditions: 1. The Applicant must file a Solemn Declaration of Substantial Completion by a Registered Professional, in accordance with Schedule D within 30 days of project completion. 2. The Applicant shall retain title to, and ownership of, the asset resulting from the use of the Contribution for five (5) years after completion of the Project. If, at any time within five (5) years from the date of completion of a Project, the Applicant sells, leases or otherwise disposes of, directly or indirectly, any asset acquired, constructed, rehabilitated or renovated, in whole or in part, under this Agreement, other than to Canada, New Brunswick, a local government, or with the consent of the Federal Minister, the Applicant may be required to reimburse Canada through the Province in whole or in part the Contribution received for the project. 3. The Applicant agrees that proper and accurate accounts and records related to this Agreement will be maintained for a period of six years following the termination of this Agreement, and that they are available to Parties for inspection at all reasonable times. 4. The Government of Canada and/or the Province of New Brunswick, at their own expense, may undertake an audit of the project. 5. The Applicant acknowledges that the Contribution is conditional upon satisfying any obligation the Government of Canada and Province of New Brunswick may have to consult with, and where appropriate, to accommodate Aboriginal groups. 6. The Applicant must adhere to all labour and environmental laws and regulations. a. If in the opinion of Canada, an environmental assessment (EA) of the project is required to be conducted in accordance with the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA), no funds or additional funds will become or will be payable unless and until an EA has been conducted in accordance with the CEAA. b. The applicant will comply with all conditions arising out of an EA conducted in accordance with the CEAA as a result of the project including the implementation, at its own expense, of mitigation measures and any follow up program. 7. The Applicant shall participate in the Agreement evaluation process. The Applicant agrees to follow the terms of the communications protocol set out in the Building Canada Framework Agreement signed December 7, 2007. (See http:// www. buildingcanada- chantierscanada.gc.ca /alt- format/pdf`/ifa- eci- nb -ene OOO.pdf.) 9. The Applicant shall allow any authorized representative of the Regional Development Corporation or the Government of Canada reasonable access to the project site(s) and information. 47 His Worship Ivan Court July 29, 2010 Page 4 10. The Applicant shall indemnify and save harmless the provincial and federal government from and against all claims, demands, losses, damages, costs of any kind based upon any injury to or death of a person or damage to or loss of property arising from any willful or negligent act, omission or delay on the part of the Applicant or its servants or agents in carrying out the contract. 11. No member of the House of Commons or the Legislative Assembly shall be a party to this project or derive any benefit arising therefrom. Should you have any questions with regards to this letter, please do not hesitate to contact Doug Holt at 444 -5804. If you are in agreement with the terms and conditions of this offer, please sign the enclosed copy of this letter and return it to the Regional Development Corporation within 120 days. Please note that any conditional acceptance renders this offer null and void. l J / Denis ro President Encls. Hereby accepted this day of 12010. 48 Mayor Ivan Court Mayor's Office Bureau du maire a_0 ( )- 'NNINT )(004 PROCLAMATION WHEREAS: the second week in February is provincially recognized as time to celebrate our heritage; and WHEREAS: the third Monday in February is National Heritage Day in Canada; and WHEREAS: the significant heritage which we have inherited from our ancestors plays a vital role in providing a unique identity to our City; and WHEREAS: our built heritage provides us with a legacy to be handed down for the benefit and enjoyment of future generations; and WHEREAS: our heritage has played a vital role in developing the rich social fabric of our City, and will continue to provide a framework for "Celebrating our Heritage" NOW THEREFORE: I, , Mayor Ivan Court CLS, of Saint John do Y hereby proclaim the week of February 14" — 21s, 2011 as Heritage Week in the City of Saint John and Monday, February 21s, 2011 as HERITAGE DAY in the City of Saint John and urge all citizens to support and participate in heritage activities occurring throughout the City. In witness whereof I have set my hand and affixed the official seal of the Mayor of the City of Saint John. P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, NB Canada E2L 41 I www.saingohn.ca 49 The City of Saint John Mayor Ivan Court Mayor's Office Bureau du maire PROCLAMATION WHEREAS: the effects of heart disease and stroke are responsible for widespread suffering and create serious hardship in our community; and WHEREAS: the Heart and Stroke Foundation of New Brunswick is taking positive action to reduce disability and death from heart and stroke disease through: 1. a planned, priority research program 2. an accelerated public and professional heart health promotion program; and WHEREAS: the Heart and Stroke Foundation of New Brunswick's Annual Person -to- Person Campaign is being conducted during the month of February 2011. NOW THEREFORE. 1, Mayor Ivan Court, -r—�f A tof Saint John do hereby proclaim the month of February 2011 as Heart Month in Saint John and urge all citizens to cooperate in the Heart Fund Drive and all civic, social and fraternal organizations and business establishments to give this campaign the greatest possible support. In witness whereof I have set my hand and affixed the official seal of the Mayor of the City of Saint John. �r SAINT ]OHN P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, NB Canada E2L 40 1 wwwsaintjohn.ca 50 C.P. 1971 Saint John, N. -B. Canada F2L 4L1 Safer Commun'it'i Ne'ighbourho Investigation Unit 3i B runs "wick Be ... in this place • bre ... ici on le peut Purpose • To make communities ar neighbourhoods safer; To empower residents by giving them the chance to take an active role in the safety of their neighbourhoods. 52 B Ne S16k "w Be ... in this place • bre ... ici on le peut Safer Communities and Neighbourhoods Units have bee successful throughout Canada._ v Brunswick is now the seventh sdiction to enact SCAN legislation. 53 B runs "wick Be ... in this place • bre ... ici on le peut Brunswick Be ... in this place • Etre ... ici on {e peut 54 1. Necessary Elements for Comp Community or neighbourhood is being affected by specific illegal activities o; near a property. ➢ A community or neighbourhood is adversely affected if activities: - negatively affect the health, safety or security of one or more persons; - interfere with the lawful use and enjoyment of property. 55 r n- B Be ... in this place • bre ... ici on le peut Adverse Effects • 1 see criminal activit, • 1 have been victimiz( I'm afraid to leave my nome don't feel safe walking in my neighbourhood Fear of being seen speaking to the police Fear of home invasions Drug paraphernalia :'. b B runs "wick Be ... in this place • bre ... ici on le peut Necessary Elemen 2. 0 0 Habitual Activities Activities must be ongoing On or near the property Specified use pppjppj,- 57 enc B runs "wick Be ... in this place • bre ... ici on le peut SCAN Targeted Actin Offences related to illegal drugs • Unlawful sale of liquor • Prostitution and related activities • Unlawful gaming activities • Use, consumption or sale of an intoxicant • Unlawful activities relating to or promoting organized crime • Possession of illegal firearms or explosives ■ Child sexual abuse /exploitation 58 b B runs "wick Be ... in this place • bre ... ici on le peut Confidential Complaint Pro Complaints received are kept confi Legislation forbids the release of information identifying the complainant OW -.am M B rCns "wick Be ... in this place • bre ... ici on le peut How will it work? 0 0 11 Investigators must verify complaint Investigation could include intervie, witness accounts, work with law enforcement and stakeholders, surveillance Report compilation .1 b B runs "wick Be ... in this place • bre ... ici on le peut Non - Judicial - Informal c t Ro"n Attempt to resolve the complaint by agreement or other informal action by Serving a warning letter on the property owner and the occupant, or to anyone else the Director considers appropriate. M. n- B run"wick Be ... in this place • bre ... ici on le peut ppli BPAWick PUBLIC SAFETY COMMUNITY SAFETY WARNIhiC1 Tho NlSw Fi+urir lck WFarrinnn7 of Pr,u= ami. % 5Ar-0rr Chrnmun' &. and "vrShpourhaodm iSCAN) In%malliplimr Unit h" r&Cglve9A a Catlplrlm In rs3a3lcn Io Id�e property Teus comptgLM wEkj rrtodo under rh& Sdlit,l L0rmMLpAWw3 and'Neighb4u3Jr44(1J4 Acteegurdrng hwhitual ac1i4itts'elytrng in offoncoa of SGIRn or Ual mp 111■ l Drugs which hmve +dv+ersely alfecteet Ifla Rafety and ! a&Cut ty of Ihla nelghhou +hand The Inv1Bdbpt.an Unrc has conduo0d an Invm0gi0On al Chia a4rVI i and the persan�sj ieWnsibiti forihese an iviha -& hav*h6eh Itwmrdad 18 []X ] Cev= Vie U6aQQ1 adiv ty rrrnMdS1`aq Farther :alas mots;] -Chet If the Illpgat onlAy dices not c*aea immatliataly. 111e SIyAN OrrWoe may' Apply is the Gour1 of Oueen'r, BwwrL Of N1mw Of- fflsw1rJr, ioa a CDffm ulnity Safely Ordw Ps pef 5ecllon SM of 1he Sobs CwHmuniVes and Not4hbavmvadsAcl revuiOno hil pemnsto wecape trio warm oo ands I of doriure of 1he pmoplfly kcdn use iar up ea 90 640 Be adwiaed -flat d rills Option is punLm -d. the respondent mayba held reMmn!p0le for all FinsnoiW CC4126 raisled to thtr invest- sliun er.d aubmmueal ecIierva zearurrtefr paled al Sa ini igb n . Fravinoe ❑1 New Brvpkgwlch, 1his__JgLP_ttlay 9d Veeaerib!�J_2010 Issued by Stsphan Ooiron Uelh3�afa, S�f�r Carrlrnunilpes and 1+F ghbourhood6 62 Brunswick Be ... in this place • Etre ... ici on le peut Non - Judicial - Informal c t Ro"n to resolve the complaint by agreement. 63 n- B run"wick Be ... in this place • bre ... ici on le peut E cii IZk Ia 5OUEST TO RE5T3LVF, COMPLAMIr DV AGREE MFHT DR INFOItMAL ACMEM TEP Thn olieelar of niSR NWUhr�r11ac4% r . bWw FhWiaWK4 I'ihn r- Mjidrtj'} nm aware ir.rlt ihn ¢i Skim CWrimginftMS and Nerghbmwhoadn 1-flreciar'7 hair reool4W "s ar rntxo Gk31-1r11o1nM 49"Ll ttly PlObA41%r pursuant ID the Saar CuminrurllfMA arad ArorprihvoyfKhkekR Acf S Rig 2414. a S-4 5, wnd herehy requwbk th■ relsU&u111Tm 01 rhr -campigjrlff „l Iry rprehmerd or Informal wicifa r mrid In portrcular. ihm cloo-mr or+l wmjnnp -jr rj• Frowcnl r contrrm rhar I rth1 the P c-nor m iTW Intentibn onq wgnv innl is ha -,g tho Property t"eitl ■ntl Mwured trnm In , 2Qtil 1 ra•que -1i the ssmritq�ce of the Diredw or h& dee -pnaue to Ocrao anj smart she Property cm erld to knr.P it AGsed until . 26111 L heftbyr au,.huiin irre biractor Cr ” deargnale lo Urrter Iho Property rend :o 'ahe whhtd*n EdElps .3r-M MrL9IOMU o1 h a sole tl19Cr9rlcn to ha ner_05*iiAry Mr the clagaae and aeruring oI Ihv Prippmoy dhE=4 its s penal I relearto and dlsch.rrgQ the Oirector aryl 4Na Pr We" ai New Mnsmck trcm any ac*orr, cause of net on nr claim w damages for or by reason fit .115y dimmif9 t h4ss or Irqury an ralalfon to the Property I Agi" to hold Harmless arsd jrrdemnlly the Direuwr artd this Proi¢n {e of New Brunswick from any acticn. causo 01 aatilm or cLaim for dama�iea py third parlros for or b} rea3om of tiny damage lass ar injury in Walton to tine Properly arced Ftr — tht9 _ daV of 241 ❑ vomesa Signature of OwnEw Manoger Narnin of OwnerlMori3ger Ac1rl res5 of DwrieN Martagef 64 B runs "wick Be ... in this place • bre ... ici on le peut Non - Judicial - Informal Director ctions fo Cnrwe% � xir%h inf'rui Alnf ir+n fr% \ /�r+�fn [:V b B runs "wick Be ... in this place • bre ... ici on le peut Bru�wick ORDER NOTICE TO VACATE PREMISES The Safer Communraos and Neighbourhoods Aer To Wnareas The Satyr Communities and Nelghaodrhoods Act suthortras Ore tafedor to racer» cm Imrds regarding spec.f..t I10g.r sclwsn occurnrq on or mar pmparbas in Rre Ptovanoe of New 8rLewmck and, Whereas via Director can order an rnvesbgoton into rho atkgad scanty. An Investigation has been conducted fegarding the property li tuatod at and It has been determined that illegal acbv&es have boon Mcke ng on Or near this prert:istes and the and actmtos are adrereely aftocnng ere neyhbowhood aid community at which the premses is located Specifics of ,gogal ad,vses ) J Take notice that the premises must be vrfcated on or botom And further We notice that rl the prem.cos s not vacated by the date sperirned above the Diredor may • Aap•Y to tno Coun of Oueen's Bondi of New Br nsxrek fora Communay Safety Otrtar as pot Section 8(2) of the Safer Commuflem and Nrhgherwrltoodr Act mqutrng al! persons to vacate the promises Be advr. ed that d nny of tiro above options are pursued. the respondent may be held rosponsrir! fw all f nancral Casts related to the invest gatron and subsequent actions requirwl Dated at Province of Now Brunswick this_day oty20A Drrectot Safer Communities and Neghbourhoods .. Brunswick Be ... in this place • Etre ... ici on {e peut Judicial Actions Apply to the Court of Queen's Benc Community Safety Order, with or wi Closure Order against the property. Apply to the Court of Queen's Bench for an Emergency Closure Order. 67 b B runs "wick Be ... in this place • bre ... ici on le peut Court Process ■ Civil process will take place in the Court of Q Bench. ■ The burden of proof in court is a "balance of probabilities ". ■ The burden of proof in a criminal proceeding 0 V "beyond a reasonable doubt ". ■ Provincial civil litigation attorneys represent SCAN in court proceedings regarding Community Safety Orders. ■ The entire court process is handled by the Unit. No complainant is involved or needs to go to court. .: BziNew,ANouveau-d n Be ... in this place • bre ... ici on le peut Options of the Court • Issue an Order to Vacate (all pE • Close the property for up to 90 • Issue an Emergency Closure Order for serious and immediate threats • Terminate Commercial or Residential tenancy agreements • Assess investigative costs to the respondent PPPMPP,j- We b B runs "wick Be ... in this place • bre ... ici on le peut Fortified Buildings Criteria 0 Any reinforcements that would make it difficult for occupants to get out in case of fire or other emergency, or for emergency responders to enter the building. Exceeds reasonable security measures. Examples: • Bullet -proof material on doors and windows • Metal plating • Armoured or reinforced doors 70 b B runs "wick Be ... in this place • bre ... ici on le peut -.agma 71 s ��� .. ��� MMM n. stm B runswick Be ... in this place • Etre ... ici on {e peut h � | U�� | � | | ' . . | ^ ' h l ~-- lfft�z-- �7-7- - � 72 / . .. ~ ' - — ` ~~ - - New,ANouveau unswiEk Be'm this place ^bm ... idomlepeu 73 B run"wick Be ... in this place • bre ... ici on le peut 74 r Bruns "wick Be ... in this place • bre ... ici on le peut 75 E ru�n A Be ... in this place • Etre ... ici on {e peut al. B runs "wick Be ... in this place • bre ... ici on le peut 77 r PPPjPjP- B ffi Be ... in this place • bre ... ici on le peut r 78 B runs "wick Be ... in this place • bre ... ici on le peut Complaint Reporting -SCAN NB Department of Public Safe F, I Toll -free complaint • 1-877- 826-212 • SCAN(&,-qnb.ca or SDCEI/(a�_qnbxa • www._gnb.ca /publicsafe WIN- 79 Brunswick Be ... in this place • Etre ... ici on {e peut REPORT TO COMMON COUNCIL M &C- 2011 -17 January 21, 2011 His Worship Mayor Ivan Court and Members of Common Council Your Worship and Councillors: SUBJECT: Proposed Rezoning —1925 Bayside Drive BACKGROUND: City of Saint John On January 4, 2011, Common Council scheduled the public hearing for the rezoning application at 1925 Bayside Drive for Monday, January 31, 2011 at 7:00 p.m. and referred the application to the Planning Advisory Committee for report and recommendation. A rezoning from "RF" Rural to "PQ" Pits and Quarries was requested by the applicant to permit the establishment of a gravel pit. The applicant has submitted the attached request that consideration of the application be postponed in order to allow further discussions with staff concerning the details of the proposal. As a result of the applicant's request, the Planning Advisory Committee did not deal with the application at its January 18, 2011 meeting. Should Common Council accept the applicant's request, staff will advise regarding a date for a rescheduled Public Hearing RECOMMENDATION: That the January 31, 2011 Public Hearing for the rezoning application of Genivar Inc. (on behalf of Barsa Ventures Ltd.) at 1925 Bayside Drive be cancelled. Respectfully submitted, Ken Forrest, MCIP, RPP Commissioner Planning and Development J. Patrick Woods, CGA City Manager Project No. 11-433 I Kliffer, Jody From: Scott Fash [Scott. Fash@genivar.coml Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2011 1:09 PM To: Kliffer, Jody Cc: barsadevelopers @rogers.com Subject: Barsa Ventures Ltd. - Request to Table Application Attachments: image001.gif; image002.gif; Barsa ventures Extraction MapColour-2] pg; SJ10056 -270 REV 17-JAN-1 1. pdf; SJ10056 -270 REV-1 7-JAN-f-1. pdf Hi Jody, As discussed on the phone our client is requesting the City table his application for the proposed variances and rezoning of PI 55188353, located off Bayside Drive. Our client would like the opportunity to sit down with yourself and Ken Forrest prior to this application going before PAC and Council. The hope is that we can come to some mutually agreeable solution to the requested side yard variance. Attached are the revised plans which show a substantially increased buffer from Bayside Drive (90 metres as requested) and from the rear portion of the property. As shown on the plans, we will be staying out the easement for the natural gas pipeline. These plans have been forwarded to Andrew Langille for his records. Please let me know the earliest time we might be able to meet with both yourself and Mr. Forrest. Thanks, Scott M GENIVAR Scott Fash, BCD I Planner GENIVAR I Constructive people 55 Driscoll Crescent, Moncton, NB, Canada El 4C8 T 506- 857 -1675 1 F 506- 857 -1679 j www.genivar.com l Scott. Fash(5genivar.com Please consider the environment before printing. CONFIDENTIALITY WARNING: This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information which is privileged, confidential, proprietary or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient or the person responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are strictly prohibited from disclosing, distributing, copying or in any way using this message. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender. and destroy and delete any copies you may have received. AVERTISSEMENT: Ce message est destine uniquement a la personne ou a I'organisation a laquelle it est adress6 et iI peut contenir des informations privQgAes, confidentielles ou non divulgables en vertu de la loi. Si vous n'etes pas le destinataire du present message ni la personne chargee de remettre le present message a son destinataire, it vous est strictement interdit de le divulguer, de le distribuer, de le copier ou de ('utiliser de quelque fagon que ce soit. Si vows avez repu la presente communication par erreur, veuillez en aviser 1'expediteur et detruire ou effacer tous les exemplaires que vous avez recus. 81 City of Saint John INTERNAL INSERTION ORDER For City of Saint John use only: i rl Budget Number: 1 10 0801 442 2010 Department: Common Clerk's Office Account # 71206 Contact: Elizabeth Gormle Phone: (506 ) 658 -2862_ Fax: 506 674 -4214 Special Instructions (if any): Reference: 1925 Bayside Drive Newspaper Insertion Dates (Check as applicable) (SJTJ= Saint John Telegraph Journal) SJTJ City Information Ad SJTJ Independent Placement SJTJ Classifieds Date(s): Tuesday, January 41h, 2011 Tuesday, January 25 ", 2011 Date(s): Date(s): Information for Ad (Boldface anything you want Bold in Ad, Centre, Tab, etc.) Section Headline: ❑ General Notice ❑ Tender ❑ Proposal ® Public Notice Sub - Headline (if applicable): Text: INSERT ATTACHED Call to Action: Elizabeth Gormley, Common Clerk/Greffiere communale Contact: Telephone: (506) 658 -2862 82 PROPOSED ZONING BY -LAW AMENDMENT RE: 1925 BAYSIDE DRIVE Public Notice is hereby given that the Common Council of The City of Saint John intends to consider amending The City of Saint John Zoning By -law at its regular meeting to be held in the Council Chamber on Monday, January 31, 2011 at 7:00 p.m., by: Rezoning a parcel of land having an area of approximately 12.4 hectares, located at 1925 Bayside Drive, also identified as being a part of PID No. 55188353, from "RF" Rural to "PQ" Pits and Quarries, as illustrated below. (INSERT MAP) REASON FOR CHANGE: To permit a gravel pit. The proposed amendment may be inspected by any interested person at the office of the Common Clerk, or in the office of Planning and Development, City Hall, 15 Market Square, Saint John, N.B. between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, inclusive, holidays excepted. Written objections to the amendment may be sent to the undersigned at City Hall. Elizabeth Gormley, Common Clerk 658 -2862 83 PROJET DE MODIFICATION DE L'ARRETE SUR LE ZONAGE OBJET: 1925, PROMENADE BAYSIDE Par les pr6sentes, un avis public est donn6 par lequel le conseil communal de The City of Saint John indique son intention d'6tudier la modification suivante a 1'arrete sur le nonage de The City of Saint John, tors de la reunion ordinaire qui se tiendra dans ]a salle du conseil le lundi 31 janvier 20116 19 b : Rezonage d'une parcelle de terrain d'une superficie d'environ 12,4 hectares, situ6e au 1925, promenade Bayside, et 6tant une partie du N1D 55188353, de zone rurale «RF» 6 zone de carri6res << PQ », comme le montre la carte ci- dessous. (INSERER LA CARTE) RAISON DE LA MODIFICATION: Permettre 1'exploitation d'une carriere. Toute personne intdressee peut examiner le projet de modification au bureau du greffier communal ou au bureau de l'urbanisme et du developpement a 1'h6tel de ville situ6 au 15, Market Square, a Saint John, au Nouveau - Brunswick., entre 8 h 30 et 16 h 30 du lundi au vendredi, sauf les jours f6ries. Veuillez faire part de vos objections au projet de modification par ecrit 6 I'attention du soussign6 a 1'h6tel de ville. Elizabeth Gormley, Greffs6re communale 658 -2862 N y tmmomuil ollfitt* 0 VA O 1 y BN1 Advertiser Name: SAINT JOHN COMMON CLERK Advertiser Code: S71206 Size: 4.00 x 5.50 in. Sales Rep: Cheryl Clements Ad Designer: PUBLIC NOTICE Public Notice is h,reby given that the Common Council of The City of Saint John intends to consider amending The City of Saint John 'Coning By -law ai AS reeul;u meeting to be held in Ilie Council Chamber on lionda.s. January 31, 2011 at 7:00 p.m., by: Rezoning r parcel of land having an area of approximatch 12 4 hectares. located at 1925 Bayside Drive. also identified as being a part of P115 No 55188353, from °RF" Rural to "PQ" Pils and Quarries, as illustrated below. Ad Number: 4449021 R Current Date: Dec 31 2010 09:51 AM Start Date: 1/4/2011 End Date: 1/2512011 Color: BNV Client Approval OK p AVIS PUBLIC Par les presentee, on avis public est donne par lequel le conseil communal de The Cuy of Saint John indique son intention d'etudier la modification smvante i 1'arriti sur le zonage do The City of Saint John, lors de la riunwn ordmaire qui se tiendra dans la salle du conseil le lundi 31 janvier 2011 i 19 h: Rezonage dune parcelle de terrain d'une superficie d'environ 12.4 hectares. situix au 1925, promenade Bayside. et titant une panic du NID 55188353, de zone rurale a RF it a zone de carrteres PQ », comme le montre la carte ci- dessous. REASON FOR CHANCE: RAISON' DE LA 'fir permit a gravel pit. MODIFICATION: Permettre I'expluttalion d'unc carrtere. The rroposcd amendment may be Tnuteptrsonnein let es >ccjivcxemincr inspected by any interested person le projet de modification au bureau at thr office of the Common Clerk. — du grelFer communal ou au bureau or in the office of Planning and de 1'urbanisme et du cl c%doppement Development. City Hall, 15 Market Square, Saint a 1' bid de ville situe au 15. Market John, N.B. between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and a 30 Squarc. a Saint John. au Nouveau - Brunswick., entre S h pm.. Monday through Friday, inclusive. holidays 30 et 16 h 30 du lundi au vendredi, sauf lesjours fines excepted. Wraten objectrons to the amendment may be sent to the undcrsigncd at City Hall. Elizabeth Gormley, Common Clerk 658 -2862 Veuillez faire part de vos objections au projet de modification par ecrit a I'attention du soussignc a 1'hiitel de Ville. Elizabeth Gormley, GrelUrc communale 658-2862 85 Corrections p GENIVAR December 14, 2010 NOTICE TO SUPPLIERS Re: Notice of the Conversion of GENIVAR Consultants Limited Partnership into a Publicly Traded Corporation, GENIVAR Inc. On April 16, 2010, GENIVAR Consultants Limited Partnership (by way of the income fund) announced its intention to convert into a publicly traded corporation on January 1St, 2011. As such, from this date going forward, you and your organization will be conducting business with GENIVAR Inc., across the country. This conversion was prompted as a result of changes adopted by the Department of Finance Canada in October 2006 with respect to publicly traded income trusts and how taxation would affect distributions to unit holders as of January 1St, 2011. This conversion will have absolutely no impact on your actual commercial relationship with our organization. The individuals and teams with whom you deal on a daily basis will continue to respect their commitments and offer the professional services you expect without interruption. From an administrative standpoint, please take note that provincial and federal tax numbers will change as a result of this conversion. Should you have any questions, please direct them to your usual contact who will gladly answer them. Yours truly, GENIVAR Consultants Limited Partnership Stephen L. Boyd, CMA Regional Controller — Atlantic Canada t Spectacle Lake Dove. Dartmouth, Nova Scalia, Canada B3B 1X7 Telephone 902 -835 -9955 - Fax 902- 835 -1645 - www.genivar.com IN 3 GENIVAR Barsa Ventures Ltd. Rezoning and Municipal Plan Amendment Technical Report December 9, 2010 SJ10056 www.genivar.com 87 :: GENIVAR Table of Contents 1. Introduction ................................................................ ..............................1 2. Site Area and Adjacent Development ...................... ............................... 2 3. Development Concept .............................................. ............................... 4 4. Requested Approvals ............................................... ............................... 6 5. Conclusion .................................................................. ..............................8 Appendices Appendix A - Existing Topographic Plan Appendix B - Post - Extraction Elevations Appendix C - Development Concept Appendix D - Easement Municipal Approvals December 9, 2010 Technical Report Barsa Ventures Ltd. Page :: 1. Introduction 0 GENIVAR Barsa Ventures Ltd. is requesting a rezoning and municipal plan amend- ment for a portion of PID 55188353, located on Bayside Drive. In order to facilitate the use of this land for a pit, our client needs to rezone the prop- erty from the RF (Rural) Zone to the PQ (Pits and Quarries) Zone. Typi- cally, the biggest issues associated with pits and quarries relates to the noise, dust and traffic that can impact adjacent properties. The Zoning By- law establishes a number of standards with the intent of mitigating or com- pletely eliminating these issues. Our client is asking for variances to reduce the required setback from other zones and property lines, however, we are of the opinion that we have prepared a site plan that meets the overall in- tent of these guidelines. Given the undeveloped nature of the area, the future plans for the property and additional measures to be undertaken by our client, we are of the opin- ion that the proposed pit operation meets the intent of the Zoning By -law and Municipal Plan and should therefore be approved. The subsequent sections of this report will describe the site, adjacent development, the overall development concept, relevant municipal plan policies and zoning by -law standards, proposed variances and provide rationale as to why the project should be approved. Technical Report December 9,2010 Municipal Approvals Barsa Ventures Ltd. Page 1 - GENNAR 2. Site Area and Adjacent Development The site is located on both sides of Bayside Drive close to the intersection with Hewitt Drive as shown in Figure 2.1. Properties to the east of Bayside Drive are quite undeveloped while there is a number of existing residential land uses close to the portion of the property west of Bayside Drive. Figure 2.1: Site Location Source: GeoNB Map Viewer (http: / /geonb.snb.,ca /geonb /) Due to the proximity of this portion of the property to other land uses, our client has opted only to pursue a rezoning and municipal plan amendment for the portion of the property east of Bayside Drive. Figure 2.2 provides the specific location of the proposed rezoning and identifies the zoning of properties within close proximity. Technical Report December 9,2010 Municipal Approvals Barsa Ventures Ltd. Page 2 1 Figure 2.2: Area of P 4�- � - - F-1 Rural Zones One and F-1 TWvo Family Residential Source: GeoNB Map Viewer (htti):Hgeonb.snb.ca /geonb /), City of Saint John Zoning Map GENNAR Pit ❑Pits and Area to be One Family Quarries Rezoned Residential Muuhiple Integrated ❑ Local Residential Development 13uslneas The majority of properties east of Bayside Drive feature rural Zoning and through review of aerial photography, site visits and property information available from Service New Brunswick, these sites are vacant. Additionally, located within ap- proximately 150 m of our client's land is a property already zoned for pits and quarries (PID 00339960). The majority of existing and planned residential devel- opment is located west of Bayside Drive, as is evidenced by the Zoning in the above figure. Given the relatively rural and undeveloped nature of this area and the fact that a pit presently exists within close proximity, there is sufficient evidence to suggest a pit or quarry can exist with little to no impact on adjacent land uses. Technical Report December 9,2010 Municipal Approvals Barsa Ventures Ltd. Page 3 3. Development Concept The long -term strategy of our client is to develop this site for residential purposes. Due to servicing and access restrictions, residential development is not feasible at the present time. The site also features a sizeable amount of quality aggregate. The intent of the proposed rezoning is to allow our client to extract the quality ag- gregate for sale while grading the property in a manner that will allow for the future development of the site. The following subsections outline the details of the pro- posed pit along with the future residential development. 3.1 Proposed Pit Use As part of our application we have prepared a topographic plan showing the existing elevations (Appendix A), along with the post extracvtion eleva- tions (Appendix B). Appendix C provides the development concept of the proposed pit, highlighting the buffer areas, toe of slope and area to be ex- cavated. Attached to this report are topographic plans of the existing prop- erty along with the proposed post - extraction elevations. In total, our client has the potential to extract approximately 440,000 m3 of aggregate from the site. As previously discussed the aggregate will be extracted in a man- ner to allow for the future placement of roads and services. Though the exact timeframe for extraction is presently unknown, our client understands the requirements of the City of Saint John and will be required to apply for a pits and quarries permit on an annual basis. Given the unde- veloped nature of this area, the only potential impact this operation could have on adjacent properties is views of the pit from Bayside Drive. Under the City of Saint John Zoning By -law, pits and quarries must be setback a minimum of 30 m from public roads. Understanding the potential visual im- pact, our client will not conduct any extraction within 50 m of Bayside Drive. The only exception would be related to work required to establish an access to the site. Additionally, our client can plant additional trees if necessary to further re- duce any visual impact from the road. 3.2 Future Residential Development Our client intends to develop this property for residential purposes. Pres- ently the site cannot be feasible serviced so this and adjacent sites will re- main relatively undeveloped until a time where services can actually be provided. Once services can feasibly be brought to this and adjacent prop- erties our client intends to develop it for residential purposes. From an en- gineering standpoint the aggregate our client is proposing to extract, would need to be extracted regardless. Due to the existing grades of the site, the property would need to be graded similarly to the attached post - extraction drawing to facilitate any future development of the site. The post - extraction plan is in essence a grading plan, done in a manner to provide a sufficient grade that allow for the future placement of roads and services in the site. The additional benefit of removing the aggregate at this stage is that it will allow our client to plant a number of trees throughout the property post - extraction which will have the opportunity to mature for the time when he is 92 GENIVAR Technical Report December 9,2010 Municipal Approvals Barsa Ventures Ltd. Page 4 93 GENIVAR able to service and develop the property for residential purposes. Recently our client purchased a stormwater and sanitary sewer easement from a resident on Debly Avenue (Appendix D). This easement will provide the necessary access to stormwater and sanitary sewer services for the site. Once water services can be provided, our client will pursue the residential development of the site. This further demonstrates our client's intentions for the future residential development of the site. Technical Report December 9,2010 Municipal Approvals Barsa Ventures Ltd. Page 5 93 4. Requested Approvals 4.1 Rezoning and Municipal Plan Amendment In order to proceed with the proposed development we will need to amend the City's Generalized Future Land Use Plan and Zoning Map. Presently the site is zoned RF (Rural Area) and we are requesting this be changed to the PQ (Pits and Quarries) Zone. The Municipal Plan briefly discusses pits and quarries and mainly establishes the need to control the operation of Pits and Quarries with respect to the following manners: (a) location; (b) hours of operation; (c) site development measures which will assist in the control of smoke, dust, odours, toxic materials, vibration and noise; (d) setbacks, yards, and separation from existing roads or uses; (e) visual screening; (f) the location of buildings and equipment; (g) safety and protective measures; (h) location of entrances and exits, and the designation of hauling routes; (i) signs and landscaping; and Q) progressive rehabilitation. Presumably these requirements are intended to protect adjacent land uses and screen negative visual impacts of a pit or quarry from adjacent prop- erty owners and the public. It is our understanding that the City developed the Pits and Quarries (PQ) Zone to address the above noted considera- tions. The rationale outlined in the Municipal Plan and standards from the Zoning By -law are intended to limit the development of pits and quarries based on location, specifically its proximity to adjacent land uses and significant envi- ronmental areas. As has been previously discussed, the property and sur- rounding area is almost entirely undeveloped and will likely remain unde- veloped until services are provided. Additionally, no significant environ- mental features have been identified on the site. Therefore, the proposed pit and quarry would not have any negative impact on adjacent land uses or significant environmental features. Our client's desire is to eventually develop this property for residential pur- poses. Should adjacent properties begin developing residential units, this would allow our client to shift his focus from the pit operation to developing residential building lots. It is also very important to note that in order to ever develop this property for residential purposes a significant amount of ag- gregate would need to be removed. The post - extraction plan (Appendix B) prepared and attached shows that material will be extracted in a manner that will allow for the relatively easy design of services and roads for the site. Once all material is extracted, our client will be left with a graded property and will plant a significant amount of trees that can be integrated into any future development of the land. 94 GENIVAR Technical Report December 9,2010 Municipal Approvals Barsa Ventures Ltd. Page 6 C .. r.. 4.2 Variances Given the dimensions of the property it is not financially feasible to meet the required side yard setback and screening requirements required of the Zoning By -law. Under the Zoning By -law the following minimum setbacks are required; Situation Required w* Proposed 991 buk Compliance Residentially Zoned Property or existing dwellings at the 150 m Between Yes time of the application 200 and 300 m Other Zones 30 m 150 m 5 m N/A 50 m No N/A Yes Public Water Supply Public Road' 30 m Property Line of Excavation 30 m 5 m No As is shown in the above table, we meet all setback requirements with the exception of the setbacks from other zones and property lines. The intent of these setbacks is to prevent the adverse effects associated with pits from impacting adjacent property owners. A 30 m setback is required and we have proposed a 5 m setback. While this may seem to be a rather sig- nificant variance, given the undeveloped nature of these properties and that development will be extremely limited for some time, we are of the opinion that the proposed setbacks meet the overall intent of the require- ments. Technical Report December 9,2010 Municipal Approvals Barsa Ventures Ltd. Page 7 95 5. Conclusion GENIVAR The previous sections have outlined how the proposed development meets the intent and spirit of the Municipal Plan and Zoning By -law. We are of the opinion that the proposed municipal plan amendment, rezoning and variances be ap- proved for the following reasons: (1) The area is undeveloped and will remain so until a time when services can feasibly be provided to the area. (2) Should services be provided, our client would be intending to develop his property for residential purposes so there would not be a situation where you have an active pit adjacent to a residential development. Our client has demonstrated this through the post - extraction drawing (Appendix B) and by purchasing the necessary easement to allow for the future servic- ing of the site. (3) In order for residential development to occur on this or adjacent proper- ties, a significant amount of aggregate would need to be removed any- way to allow for the placement of roads and services. Our client is simply taking a proactive approach to have a graded site featuring mature trees for the time when development is possible. (4) Our client has taken additional measures to mitigate any potential impact from Bayside Drive through providing 20 m of additional buffer. (5) One adjacent property approximately within 150 m is already Zoned Pits and Quarries. The proposed operation is located approximately the same distance away from any land used for residential purposes. Technical Report December 9,2010 Municipal Approvals Barsa Ventures Ltd. Page 8 GENNAR Appendix A Existing Topographic Plan 97 98 uRFA ITV CUFTM LEGEND 1111101 IMQ A h IIV.O Yrt. •�aR 1U�1 • w ova NN • uixm- • w ' v solve .a.1• w vo +am s.R. iv ■ ooa a10 �..a s. ❑ ■ �r 4e v W R� • � � 11b PlY / 11[ MYrI plry aR ►WI � 1 l bas uv r ao.. w `ua a m:ei — • Y�1a L10 vas o — 1wl x.ew '� a uw e11a s bH au 1a MME i NO76 -THE DOMMOTT NUYBfA3 REFERRED TO ON TM PLAN ARE THOSE OF THE m111M lWStRY OMCE. - PROPERTY LIQS AND ADJACENT OWNER 26ORMATION O•TAOED FROM SIB RECORDS. - CERTFXAT1011 M NOT WADE AS TO LEGAL RTLE, BEING THE DOMAIN OF A LAW03L MR TO 711E ZONING k SETBACK BY -LAWS OR RECU.A11OW BEING 711E DOMAIN OF A DEVEI PIRRT OFFICD1. - CERTIFICATION IS NOT MADE AS TO COVENANTS SET OUT IN THE DOUAIIEN (S) AND THE LDCATION OF ANY UNDERGROUND SERMQS AM0 FOHIUTES. PERMANENT OR OTHERWISE. - tJi1T0URS BA4D pl CEDAR DATA COLLECTED ON JUNE. 2001. WED TOPOQUPMD PLAN PREPARED N FAVOR OF: WATED (IN THE EAST SIDE OF BAYS■E DROVE. TY OF SANT J". PARISH OF SANT JDHOI OUNTY OF SAINT JOIM. PROYONt OF lE'f BMD6WIOR a • o a a r1...1�r la..rwra �r' GENIVAR �,, u•� m E1TMs ■ 11.: gfl a c"toom -Sf0 1E0CTt1¢1L t{. =0 GENIVAR Appendix B Post - Extraction Elevations .. ° ty` °."^ 3 , ° TFIOLEAS DE�noPi(aTa' 4„ „m '• 1 ' PD e160e4 TOP OF SLOPE GRADE ///•••SOP OF SEIDE M10 / SLOP wttN TO OOSiC �� ?m r'x" �WTCH TOE ONO GROPE PRCPEII:Y p101DAnr IICISTIAtSED 1:.E/E7I- - / i Q/ yi / LRRFTTI / �- "'1-�- m�olsaaPE-- � ----- -n- -- --- � = t�-------- '----^--t�--"'----- �- Ti>ETR'aac-- �---- ^---- �' - - -- � - -- O / / / ( 1 G4^ IMF — .., ^• �. I Z / mom/ !1 - -- NI,�- .....'�� °'`F 7i � � � . -_ ,•,..1� J APO ssslowtu �re - _ - - -- t'-. ---�-- _ - - _ RToEO Sa01L _ _-- ^ ^_ ---- - � - - - - -- $1/ UNDISTURBED BUFFER•, jp n 4 !} TOP OF SLIDE , J •� ►ROPOItt OW DAIIY b n. ,VO Bj O,F 6*^ •d� / MATCH TO EOSINS GRADE 'Y ly^ F. � q0^ ' - TOP OF SLOPE r, .+� , E eE E € . �F mom TO El"Dwo WADE 1 A. JOHN OE1LY ESTATE j PO eTNM ALL AREAS NOT S/A[0.1IID FY ROL7! TO Frt NTpRDSUacD l 14, 'r � ��, f �' J•f � I 'osn•., t MINAS DEVEEORONTIL S f Fm e1N44 %call, Ie ea"ey eem S "S, S �r4, �4` q'm . f V n it I TOP Or SLIDE I c f .{*^ TOP OF QdE W1131 10 EOSINS GRADE " l/ ,F q`F•GL, `•' n-J•r ,d" . • / T PRWE]ITV BOUNDARY >l. • i _ OATCN m EFSiSlO oRADc C a -ean `,gmTIIOWD I.. ____ - ... -.. -- TOE D►SLOPE - 1�•_ - -_� -- � J- - - - -�,- --- _-- _- _�� -- ..__.----- WI ~J - W OO ZI E _ 4 1? �/- if IE E F a ^�� ~ OARSA VENMKS LTM oo" X: I 1 F L Pa 5 Moom f r - -- ----- - - - -�q -,DE or stioPE �--- - -- - -- ----- - - -_�- __ ___a- _-- _--- __- '-- ____ -t_ - - - - -� �a a aDPE--- �---- - - - -J° -- --- - - -°q' _ - - A� . ... �I 1ID OF SLOPE-/ n,M1` PROPCKTr autsomY qa,' .F ; `I I J WATCH TO DoSTNO OPADE ' 9'� y'YR• . a �E oTF $ MATCH TO f703ERIC GRADE ' ° I .011 J er a_f ' j p f °tf f A. PO 416644 ESTATE 6644 S\_ 104, f ,per• ; � THWAS e F P9 4166+4 O�AIM OF TO �TNO GRADE - " f WATCH To E�WNIG fRADE "'; l> 1 PROPERTY ewNDAR + 1 - - - - -� pF 9AP E -- - -- - - - - -- - I�--- •- - --� -- ---- EISFr'--- - - - - -- -- ICE tx aQE - 1�-------- -��- --' - - -^ J ! Sal d00. PD 56 TdRr .1 -- - �'--- - - - - -- TDEDrsoPE .�--- - - - --- -- - - -- - - -� ---- ----- �--- roEO---- ��- �----- - -� - -- r q� LAN L _ .. - - . _. — I N� . _ __ _ _ _ _ - ._ - ...._. 1.. _. • al � +. _.�rT �PIAID 13eET0 1 lAlta Lm -eon 10lYSTLO® S1STiIW ,- PRDPERn BOUNDARY P RK MIND IND WAG[ To7 OP Sun � " / `•�. ` .q�`n MATCH TO EIOSRIIO OUSE e A. JOHN OES,Y ESTATE '+) •• T - 1 `,>�e A: • �lC �„ �' y7^ . N' PO ♦lNH 1 Ri'y q'T 1t;A F S J df ; 3F o "" a6 APPROXIMATE CUT r r 443,900m' SA 100 PROPOSED EDOSTWO WATERMAN t GTE VANE SOO 4" (TIREET, KLYMM RAM -��- SWTARY WUOIQE A PIPE —��� —♦ — —� STGOL MANHOLE A PIPE WWW.OENNAROOIE URFTY POE A LSCS SHEET DESCRFmm - EDGE Of PAVOICHT -- - - - - -- TOP 6 9fR HGOL SCAE- _.!S9RQ �-� TOE T SLOPE -- -_ - - -- --- --. .... - - -- PROPEtIn 6QMDARY -- — I Ex smrwe TATOOR - - - - FLDR DIRECMM ARROW STM 1Amm -- -- SWALE/OtTCH WATER uTEIAL h - -- POLL GUY tlq+F, AAOIGL GTOI EA571 LEAD ___- GTUIeAsw EDCAP D �NHT fD� (ITDNANI E -.� EX GLADE ," EASE]FMT PR D11" zn SNQADER L. - - -- A/0lJI PAO6E AP-I■ ROAD 90v - TEIIP. F msm CARRQ srmxrIAE 1 Soon 2016126 H O 20 wIIS.s AO 60 00 SCALE 1:1000 No, I DESCW TION I CKK'D I DATE I A GENIVAR SOO 4" (TIREET, KLYMM RAM SAINT JOHN, NO 9ADTr JOHN, NEW ELFEKSWICK OAT(ADA M to PF"EE 546 8046/10 - FAX SW 6¢74601 e WWW.OENNAROOIE I CLIENT I t BARSA VENTURES LTD 1701 RED HEAD ROAD SAINT JOHN, NO PROJECT PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT PID 55188353 BAYSIDE DRIVE, SAINT JOHN NB SHEET DESCRFmm E POST EXTRACTION PLAN DATE---17- NOV -1010 SHOP HGOL SCAE- _.!S9RQ NUT. SCALE DRAWN- - - - -- OF CHECKED_ - -. - -.WM w ftu No.-, _wi Ju _ I Appendix C Development Concept 101 GENNAR TOP Of Wo" PATCH TD E1rsTr"6 lL 4Y •yI iT�- ,vs.iv,'_s__ -- ^- 4TH - -4 4 .'I N"DMAS BEAEL,PWENTS PD 41"" n+I. VrtH ZI ,W tEDff. A PID 4 p�tuTAT[ A.L ATIEAS tqr srA�1xED TTr HImT TO THE NvOReq[OFI, r1famAs 11EACLOPUENTS PQ 41M44 1P ZF SLUK LFX" 177 ET,! �w z J ``z I~ . I � -�� AIM .•.. __r--- � --- -- -- _ I ILP Of SLOPE WATCH 10 ENSTW, GRAM TEO Or SLOPE IAt Tf SOC WATCH TO F*STTNG =Fala wt_r TOM r@4 WADE k I `nLmr, L mw* 1CP Or SI/PE �ATCN TO IWST9H -' Vr uI-- 2� cx � TCP (f V-]1i'r YATON TI. QADE A JDM MMY ESTATE PD 4l8µ4 TICNAS DENLOPRIEWIS PD 4104 SLhi TD EJDSTINc GMOE P4]4E41} 000kQAJT7 — - - -7 -- - - - - -- P '�I IMP t 16 7 Ar }� .c. am1d H4Y J �' _ _ _ . _ _ _ : I _ '9EF _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ NItiaAN,1s cA1HAPatr LANDS 4TD HD SSN70 A JO"N 0MV ESTATE PD 4104 102 APPROXIMATE CUT 143.1vC'T 1 ti D a Legend Landscaped Buffer Tow of Slope Extraction Area 201c'7B 1 J '0 MEWS s0 BO !b �M GENNAR 580 NNN STREET, "ILYARD PLACE SAWT JOHN. NEW BRUNSWICK CANADA E2K US PHCHE_ 500 614 -8719 -FAX SOD 003-WO W NW.GENWARCOM BARSA VENTURES LTD 1701 RED HEAD ROAD SAINT JOHN, NB I PROJECT 1 PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT PID 55188353 BAYSIDE DRfVE, SAINT JOHN NB I SWET DESCRIPTION POST EXTRACTION PLAN — m, —WC— -��FZc 7817 -- W a YTJ I J Ny F __ -- —___ �I rw OF %nd-y YATtli ti �i:ifi WADE .•rP o< ROPE TO EXKTFN• OTAOE 1CP Or SI/PE �ATCN TO IWST9H -' Vr uI-- 2� cx � TCP (f V-]1i'r YATON TI. QADE A JDM MMY ESTATE PD 4l8µ4 TICNAS DENLOPRIEWIS PD 4104 SLhi TD EJDSTINc GMOE P4]4E41} 000kQAJT7 — - - -7 -- - - - - -- P '�I IMP t 16 7 Ar }� .c. am1d H4Y J �' _ _ _ . _ _ _ : I _ '9EF _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ NItiaAN,1s cA1HAPatr LANDS 4TD HD SSN70 A JO"N 0MV ESTATE PD 4104 102 APPROXIMATE CUT 143.1vC'T 1 ti D a Legend Landscaped Buffer Tow of Slope Extraction Area 201c'7B 1 J '0 MEWS s0 BO !b �M GENNAR 580 NNN STREET, "ILYARD PLACE SAWT JOHN. NEW BRUNSWICK CANADA E2K US PHCHE_ 500 614 -8719 -FAX SOD 003-WO W NW.GENWARCOM BARSA VENTURES LTD 1701 RED HEAD ROAD SAINT JOHN, NB I PROJECT 1 PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT PID 55188353 BAYSIDE DRfVE, SAINT JOHN NB I SWET DESCRIPTION POST EXTRACTION PLAN Appendix D Easement 103 GENIVAR ,l Panel Identifier of Parcel Burdened by Encumbrance Parcel Identifier of Parcel Benefiting from Encumbrance: Grantor of Encumbrance: Grantee of Encumbrance: Consenting Party: aY58183g ENCUMBRANCE AGREEMENT PID 338917 5�- (gq � S 3 q1--- PID 65010037 TURRELL, William Danbury 105 Debly Avenue Saint John, N.B. E2P 1.12 TURRELL, Jennifer Mary 105 Debly Avenue Saint John, N.B. E2P 1J2 BARSA VENTURES LTD. 1701 Red Head Road Saint John, N.B. E2P iK5 a� 0 2 2007 FIRST NATIONAL FINANCIAL GP CORPORATION 44 Chipman Hill Saint John, N.B. E21- 4S6 Description of Encumbrance: 8.0 meter wide Easement for Municipal Services Purposes of Easement: To grant a utility easement to the grantee Diagram of Encumbrance: See sketch as shown on Schedule "A" attached hereto. The grantor grants to the grantee the described encumbrance over or in the specified parcel for the specified purposes. Date: September l� 2007. yyr Grantor of Encumbrance: on am Danbury Turrell With Grantor of Encumbrance: Theodore son nn er urre . ,..... to Grantee of Encumbrance: _ o) ? - 1 BARSA NTURES LTD. ' er: ems e Pros nt Consenting Party: FIRST NATIONAL FINANCIAL GP CORPORATION MOROSC 8r: Supervisor, CustomerServfo \r��J DDlE STAIN Per: •`Marager Customer Service 104 is if SCHEDULE ^A" � ly tOy ? ,°I ooh ,off �d • 6�,° o J o° ry '\k eS 19 'rill 0,9 Oak XO de J �e9' �'•i fo 0( �ya y Sketch Showing Easement for Municipal Services crossing William and Jennifer Turrell Property City of Saint John , County of Saint John , Province QBrunswick 0 ce of New e 60 80 1 :1000 metre HUGHES SURVEYS & CONSULTANTS Ir 105 Form 45 AFFIDAVIT OF CORPORATE EXECUTION Land Tltfes act, S.N.B. 1981, c- L -1.1, 8.55 Deponent: Kemal Dably 1701 Red Head Road Saint John, N6 E2P 1 K5 Office Held by Deponent Presldent Corporation: BARSA VENTURES LTD. Place of Execution: Saint John Date of Executkm: September �l , 2007. I, Kemal Debty, the deponent, make oath and say: 1. That I hold the office specified above In the corporation specified above, and em authorized to make this affidavit and have personal knowledge of the matters hereinafter deposed to; 2. That the allachad Instrument was executed by me as the officer duty authorized to execute the Instrument on behalf of the corporation; 3. That the seal of the corporation was affixed to the instrument by order of the Board of Dlrectors of the corporation; 4. That the instrument was executed at the place and on the date specified above; 5. That the ownership of a share of the corporation does not entitle the ownerthersof to occupy the parcel described in the attached instrument as a marital home. DECLARED TO BEFORE ME at the City of Saint John, in the County of Saint John and Pro>vi c�e of New Brunswick, on the .--(`�'= day of Septe er, 007. �at— / Theodore E. Wilson commissioner of Oaths, Being a Solicitor I. 1 Form 55 AFFIDAVIT OF MARITAL STATUS Land Trues Act, S.N.B. 1981, c.L -1.1, s.81 Deponent: WILLIAM DANBURY TURRELL 105 Debly Avenue Saint John, NB E2P 112 JENNIFER MARY TURRELL 145 Debly Avenue Saint John, NB E2P 1 J2 We, William Danbury Turrell and Jennifer Mary Turrell, the deponents, jointly and severally, make oath and say: 1. That we are the persons conveying an interest in the attached instrument and have personal knowledge of the matters hereinafter deposed to. 2. That we are married to each other. 3. That neither of us have a former spouse with a right under the Marital Property Act to any interest in or possession of the subject land. 4. That the subject land has been occupied by us as our marital home. That we have both joined in this instrument and have consented to the disposition for the purpose of complying with section 19 of the Marital Property Act. SEVERALLY SWORN TO BEFORE ME at the City of Saint John, in the County of Saint John and Province of New Brunswick on the ^!3F" day of September, 2007. Th ore E. Wilson A Commissioner of Oaths Being a Solicitor as to both Signatures 107 Form 44 CERTIFICATE OF EXECUTION L4nd Titles Act, S.N.B. 1981, e.L -1.1, s55 Notary Public: Jurisdiction: Place of Residence of Notary Public: Persons Who Executed the Instrument: Theodore E. Wilson 10 Prince Edward Street Suite D Saint John, NB E2L 4M5 New Brunswick Saint John, NB WILLIAM DANBURY TURRELL and JENNIFER MARY TURRELL Place of Execution: Saint John, NB Date of Execution: September l , 2007 I, THEODORE E. WILSON, a Notary Public in and for the jurisdiction specified above and residing at the place of residence specified above, do hereby certify: I , That the persons who executed the attached instrument personally appeared before me; 2. That the persons are known to me, and their identities have been proved to my satisfaction; 3. That I explained to the persons the contents of the attached instrument to the best of my professional abilities; 4. That, after receiving the explanation, the persons executed the attached instrument voluntarily at the place and on the date specified above; 5. That the persons acknowledged that they are of the age of majority, 6. That I have ascertained that the names by which the persons are identified in the attached instrument are the persons' name in accordance with the Naming Conventions Regulation under the Land Titles Acr,, and 7. That I have signed the attached instrument next to the signatures of the persons for whom this Certificate of Execution has been prepared, with my name printed legibly underneath my signature. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunt4,,s&.}and and affixed my Notarial Seal. �p, - S:.N Place: Saint John, NB a z Y LU Date: Augst 2007: ; . j ►�u0`� �y�J� f_ Notary Public: Tl4F0D RE E. WILSON m FORM 45 AFFIDAVIT OF CORPORATE EXECUTION Land Titles Act, S.N.B. 1981, c.L -1.1, s.55 Deponent: EDDIE STAMP 100 University Avenue Toronto, OntHrio M5J 1 V6 Office Held by Deponent: Corporation: Other Officer Who Executed the Instrument: Office Held by Other Officer who Executed the instrument: Place of Execution: Date of Execution: Manager, Customer Service FIRST NATIONAL FINANCIAL GP CORPORATION MICHAEL AMOROSO 100 University Avenue Toronto, Ontario M57 1 V6 Supervisor, Customer Service Toronto, Ontario September 13'n, 2007, I, Eddie Stamp, the deponent, make oath and say: I . That I hold the office specified above in the corporation specified shove, and am authorized to make this affidavit and have personal knowledge of the matters hereinafter deposed to. 2. That the attached instrument was executed by me and Michael Amoroso, the other officer specified above, as the officers duly authorized to execute the instrument on behalf of the corporation. 3. That the seal of the corporation was affixed to the instrument by order of the Board of Directors of the corporation. 4. That the instrument was executed at the place and on the date specified above. 5. That the ownership of a sham of the corporation does not entitle the owner thereof to occupy the parrel described in the attached instrument as a marital home. SWORN TO: BEFORE ME at the ) city of Toronto, i e rovince of ) Ontario,! Y of ) Sept ZOOfi:'•: ' } i Eddie Stamp P A EDDIE STA NdtrjVhl�S���' } M �4 Mara9 Serv�ca Frovinae'oi�ntaRli3• ) er. Customer Ruben k.9icrr;et PaTrbuk No-ary P N I:i;y of Yaon:o. MOW to tn. .y hetrummrh and Uie dldno co FIRST NATIONAL FINANCIAL LP 100 University Ave., N. Tower, 12th floor TofuM, Ontario 645,11V6 109 CERTIFICATE OF LEGAL EFFECT PID: 55010037 Registered Owner: BARSA 'DENTURES LTD. THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT the legal effect of the registration of the attached Encumbrance Agreement on the current Certificate of Registered Ownership for the specified parcel is as follows: :iEM0_e To add a benefit to the PEI) databank DATE: Octo 1", 2 Subscriber: L_ 007 THEODORE E. WILSON Theodore E. Wilson 10 Prince Edward Street, Suite D Saint John, NB E21, 4M5 OUR FILE NO.: 9169 CERTIFICATE OF LEGAL EFFECT PID: 336917 Registered Owner: TURRELL, William Danbury TURRELL, Jennifer Mary THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT the legal effect of the registration of the attached AmendnIeDt on the current Certificate ofRegistered Ownership for the specified parcel is as follows: ADDITION: To add an encumbrance: BARSA VENTURES LTD. Instrument: Encumbrance Agreement DATE: October 1", 2007 Subscriber: C�;Ujk� THEODORE E. WILSON Theodore E. Wilson 10 Prince Edward Street, Suite D Saint John, NB E21, 4M5 OUR FILE NO.: 9169 111 BY -LAW NUMBER C.P. 110 - A LAW TO AMEND THE ZONING BY -LAW OF THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN Be it enacted by The City of Saint John in Common Council convened, as follows: The Zoning By -law of The City of Saint John enacted on the nineteenth day of December, A.D. 2005, is amended by: 1 Amending Schedule "A ", the Zoning Map of The City of Saint John, by re- zoning a parcel of land having an area of approximately 12.4 hectares, located at 1925 Bayside Drive, also identified as being a part of PID No. 55188353, from "RF" Rural to "PQ" Pits and Quarries - all as shown on the plan attached hereto and forming part of this by -law. IN WFFNESS WHEREOF The City of Saint John has caused the Corporate Common Seal of the said City to be affixed to this by -law the * day of *, A.D. 2011 and signed by: Mayor /Maire ARRETE No C.P. 110 - ARRETE MODIFIANT L'ARRETE SUR LE ZONAGE DE THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN Lors d'une reunion du conseil communal, The City of Saint John a decrete ce qui suit : Uarrete sur le zonage de The City of Saint John, decrete le dix -neuf (19) ddcembre 2005, est modifid par: 1 La modification de Vannexe «A », Plan de zonage de The City of Saint John, permettant de modifier la designation pour une parcelie de terrain dune superficie d'environ 12,4 hectares, situee au 1925, promenade Bayside, et etant une partie du NID 55188353, de zone rurale «RF» a zone de carrieres « PQ » - toutes les modifications sont indiquees sur le plan ci joint et font partie du present arrete. EN FOI DE QUOI, The City of Saint John a fait apposer son secau communal sur le present arrete le 2011, avec les signatures suivantes Common Clerk/Greffiere communale First Reading - Premiere lecture Second Reading - Deuxieme lecture Third Reading - Troisieme lecture 112 a,z(a) City of Saint John INTERNAL INSERTION ORDER For City of Saint John use only: Budp-et Number: 110 0801 442 2010 Department, Comi Contact: Elizabeth Phone: (506) 658 -2862 Special Instructions (if any): Fax: (506) 674 -4214 Reference: Section 39 Amendment — 515 -519 Westmorland Road (McAllister Place) Newspaper Insertion Dates (Check as applicable) (SJTJ= Saint John Telegraph Journal) SJTJ City Information Ad SJTJ Independent Placement SJTJ Classifieds Date(s): Tuesday, Jan 4th, 2011 AND Tuesday, Jan 25, 2011 Date(s): Date(s): Information for Ad (Boldface anything you want Bold in Ad, Centre, Tab, etc.) Section Headline: ❑ General Notice ❑ Tender ❑ Proposal IN Public Notice Sub - Headline (if applicable): Text: INSERT ATTACHED Call to Action: Elizabeth Gormley, Common Clerk/Greffiere communale Contact: Telephone: (506) 658 -2862 113 PROPOSED SECTION 39 AMENDMENT RE: 515 -519 WESTMORLAND ROAD (McALLISTER PLACE) Public Notice is hereby given that the Common Council of The City of Saint John intends to consider a proposal at its regular meeting to be held in the Council Chamber on Monday, January 31, 2011 at 7:00 p.m., by: Amending the Section 39 conditions imposed on the December 7, 1987 rezoning of the property located at 515 -519 Westmorland Road (McAllister Place), also identified as PID No. 00285932, to permit a revised proposal. REASON FOR CHANGE: To permit an approximately 5900- square -metre expansion of the shopping centre. The proposed amendment may be inspected by any interested person at the office of the Common Clerk, or in the office of Planning and Development, City Hall, 15 Market Square, Saint John, N.B. between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, inclusive, holidays excepted. Written objections to the amendment may be sent to the undersigned at City Hall. Elizabeth Gormley, Common Clerk 658 -2862 114 PROJET DE MODIFICATION DE L'ARTICLE 39 OBJET; 515 -519, CHEMIN WESTMORLAND (McALLISTER PLACE) Par les pr6sentes, un avis public est donnd par lequel le conseil communal de The City of Saint John indique son intention d'examiner une proposition lors de la r6union ordinaire qui se tiendra dans la salle du conseil le lundi 31 janvier 2011 a 19 h en apportant les modifications suivantes : Modification des conditions imposdes en vertu de Particle 39, le 7 d6cembre 1987, relativement au rezonage de la propri6te situde au 515 -519, chemin Westmorland (McAllister Place), et portant le NID 00285932, pour permettre la pr6sentation d'une proposition r6vis6e. RAISON DE LA MODIFICATION: Permettre un agrandissement d'environ 5 900 metres carr6s du centre commercial. Toute personne int6ress6e peut examiner la modification proposee au bureau du greffier communal ou au bureau de 1'urbanisme et du d6veloppement a 1'h6tel de ville au 15, Market Square, Saint John, N. -B., entre 8 h 30 et 16 h 30 du lundi au vendredi, sauf les jours f6ri6s. Veuillez faire part de vos objections au projet de modification par dcrit A Pattention du soussign6 a 1'h6tel de ville. Elizabeth Gormley, Greffi6re communale 658 -2862 ON1 Advertiser Name: SAINT JOHN COMMON CLERK Advertiser Code: S71206 Size: 4.00 x 5.50 Sales Rep: Cheryl Clements Ad Designer: PUBLIC NOTICE Public Notice is hereby given that the Common Council of The City of Saint John intends to consider a proposal at its regular meeting to be held in the Council Chamber on Monday, January 31, 2011 at 7:00 p.m., by: Amending the Section 39 conditions imposed on the December 7,1987 rezoning of the property located at 515 -519 Westmorland Road t %IcAlhsicr Place). also identified as PID No. 00285932. to permit a revised proposal. REASON FOR CHANGE: 10 permit an ipproxiniotel) 5900- square -metre expansion of the shopping centre The proposed amendment may be inspected by any mtcrestcd person at the office of the Common Clerk, or in the office of Planning and DevOopinent. Cny Hall, 15 Market Square, Saint John, N.B. between the hours of 8 30 a.m. and 410 p m.. Monday through Friday. inclusive, holidays excepted Written objections to the amendment may be sent to the undersigned at City Hall. Elizabeth Gormley. Common Clerk 659-2862 Ad Number: 44490228 Current Date: Dec 31 2010 09:51AM Start Date: 1/412011 End Date: 1/25/2011 Color: B/W Client Approval OK ❑ AVIS PUBLIC Par les prisentes, un avis public est donne par lequel le consed communal de The City of Saint John indique son intention Texaminer une proposition lors de la reunion ordmaire qui se tiendia dans la salle du conseil le lundi 31 jemier 2011 i 19 h en . pporlant les modifications suncntes : Modification des conditions impos&s en vertu de Particle 39. le 7 d6cembre 1987, relalivement au rezonage de la propri616 suu6e au 515 -519, chemin Westmorland (McAllister Placel, et portant le NID 00285932, pour permcure ]a presentation dune proposition r&ike. RAISON DE LA MODIFICATION: Permeltre un agrandissement d'environ 5 900 metres carr6s du centre commercial. Toule personne mleressce pout examiner la modification proposee au bureau du greffter communal no au bureau de l'urbanisme et du developpemem a l'h6tel de ville au 15, Market Square. Saint John. N -B., entre 8 h 30 et 16 h 30 du lundi au vendredi, sauf les jours ferics Veudlez faire part de vos objections au projet de modification par ecril i I'aticnnon du soussign6 d 1'h6tel de ville Elizabeth Gormley, GrefB6re communale 658 -2862 115 Corrections ❑ V Cadillac Fairniew Montreal, 20 December 2010 Mr Mark Reade, P.Eng., MCIP, RP Senior Planner Planning & Development P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, NB Canada E21L 41.1 Mark.reade@saintjohn.ca Dear Sir, Obiect: Amendment to Section 39 Agreement, McAllister Place, Saint John Cadillac Fairview has requested an amendment on the maximum area of the shopping centre previously agreed upon in 1995. This letter will serve to justify our request for such an amendment. This amendment consists of a request for an additional area of 58,000 sq. ft. to answer the increasing demand for quality retail space in Saint John. Our dominant position in this market and the renovation we have completed in 2009 have had a positive impact on the leasing potential for this centre. Tenants new to the market are considering a complete presence in our 3 malls (McAllister Place, Regent Mail and Champlain Place). Answering their requirement is paramount to their development strategy in the Maritimes. Also, existing tenants who are very successful have decided to expand and need more space to answer the customer demand for their product. The following tenants have indicated their intention to expand or locate themselves in the market: Lawtons Drugs: expansion from their existing 5561 sq. ft. store into a 16,000 sq. ft. facility which Includes a medical clinic of 4,000 sq. ft. on the second Floor, thus requiring an expansion of the building of 12,500 sq. ft. on two levels. We are talking to a couple of restaurant operators who are present in other markets in New Brunswick. They both have locations in Fredericton and Moncton and have now showed interest In the Saint John market. We are presently in discussion for two exterior locations (8,500 and 7,200 sq. ft.) next to the main entrance on Westmorland. A newly opened home wear operator (12,800 sq. ft.) in the Dieppe /Moncton area has indicated they will be looking at the Saint John market. They will require a space with exterior fagade and access. La Corporation Cadillac Fairview Lirnitee Ponereuille de 1'Est du Canada 7999, boul. Les Galcrics- d'Anjou, bureau 2220, Ville d'Anpu, Quebec HIM Iw9 Telephone 514- 353 -4411 fax 514 -353 -4553 116 C", - Finally, we will actively pursue new to market fashion retailers with sizes between 15 and 25,000 sq. ft. with possible exterior accesses. Efforts will continue to be made to improve the exterior aspect of the shopping centre with lively storefronts. Many of our potential tenants ( Lawtons, restaurants etc.) will permit such a metamorphosis of the exterior treatment and aspect. We trust others will follow in this direction. Of course, modifications to the interior roadway system will need to be made and attention to the landscaping will continue. Although it is difficult to give a timeline to these new developments and tenancy, we know that Lawtons Drugs is ready to move ahead as soon as we receive the go -ahead from the City. Other prospects will confirm their interest in the near to medium future and it is expected that within a period of three years, we may have completed the plan. We hope we have answered some questions regarding future tenancy and development at McAllister Place and that the Lawton's expansion, which is the next step towards an improved centre, will be allowed to move ahead rapidly in line with Lawton's development expectations. Best Regards. Ivan Boulva Vice President, Development Eastern portfolio The Cadillac Fairview Corporation Limited Cc: Mr Dick Anderson, Architect Mr Norman Stein, CF Project Management Mr David Greene, CF General Manager 117 PARKWAY MALL GROSS BUILDING AREA — Nsm OW Bilk AREA - 55WI SY. OMM PARKIC - 2947 SPACES ffmmTmz HHHHHHE HMH ANN p 0 W 0� xw- REYVM QW ULLUM AREA - 619.315 S.F. FnM PARI611C - 2612 SPIES O PARKWAY MAIL � � c 10' `� Ullul�lum '$ mTTTTTTmo ' DA l mr MHR 1• - Iaf-e [ll GROSS RUWNG AREA — DOPANSION KO mu ANDERSON ARCHITECT L' 1• M 1• T H• D rn w An W I.ISIIwr�wll � ►lam YM Ib (Lip!!]lf k ('�9trn O [Yh. [ Mfnfd" Cadillac Fairview .TER PLACE BURMr AREA ER D" M. NEW WMNS CK AMA - Emnt AMA - EVAII ® o� WA o9zMW no u AS mffu I - IW-d p 2010 --ON 11 9u -1 61A65 IFASAEIE MU - 473.6JIF. E ZTW PAMW - 7,647 SPI PARKWAY MALL 4, GROSS LEASABLE AREA - DOSING 0 'mot ®7�yN, FEW 61065 LEASABLE AM - 511.687 S.F. MM PAf00dG - 7,677 SPALES PARKWAY MALL A '!r� 1�s r! %r 8' rr ri�,�i ir'ii riiriiiri�'r' / /rrhi,i/ EI l / •r r - W-r 6U GROG ac!! BU AREA - EXPANSION O ARCHITECT L•I- M•I•T-E•D rnw.aa W 11411-\ DY®.11{ 0 s� w,.n C" Cadillac Fairview MCALUSTO PLACE GRUBS I FASAM C AREA M.AU -S 71 ORK SMNT .Al01, NN ORUMSMQ[ ALA - ERA.Q AVA - mANWO t� Dom MA 4 ®� SIM r< AS MK. - Ice-C p 2MO-on 11 SKA -2 Planning Advisory Committee January 20, 2011 Your Worship and Councillors: P.O. Box 1971 506 658 -2800 Saint John New Brunswick Canada E2L 41-1 City of Saint John SUBJECT: Proposed Section 39 Amendment - 515 -519 Westmorland Road (McAllister Place) On January 4, 2011 Common Council referred the above matter to the Planning Advisory Committee for a report and recommendation. The Committee considered the attached report at its January 18, 2011 meeting. Mr. Richard Anderson, representing Anderson Architect Ltd. , the applicant, attended the meeting and advised that he was in agreement with the staff recommendation but was looking for clarification for the requirements regarding the stormwater, and water and sewer analysis required. Mark Reade responded that he discussed this with Municipal Operations and Engineering and they are in receipt of the stormwater assessment for the first phase of the development (Lawtons) and that the water and sanitary sewer analysis will deal with the additional flows for the new retail areas. Mr. Rod Adams, representing Eastpoint, appeared before the Committee and spoke in favour of the development citing the proposed expansion will provide continued retail growth in the City. Mr. Adams expressed concern with potential traffic increases, stormwater management and curbing in the parking areas. Staff and the applicant addressed Mr. Adams concerns regarding the development. David O'Brien of Barry Spalding appeared before the Committee representing the Morland Trailer Park and expressed concerns regarding site drainage and suggested changes to the proposed wording of the Section 39 Amendments. Crystal Lockerbie of 84 Simpson Drive, representing the Glen Falls Community Committee, appeared before the Committee and questioned the impacts of the development on the site and flooding. Staff responded that the paved parking area is not being enlarged and that the amount of runoff on the site will remain the same as portions of the asphalt parking area will become roofs, having the same runoff characteristics. Brian Mosher of Mosher Chedore appeared before the Committee representing the Glen Falls Community Committee and noted his concerns were covered off by the previous presentations. 120 -2- Richard Anderson reappeared before the Committee and addressed the concerns raised, noting the mall is not creating the flooding problem and will not be increasing the flooding in the area. He also noted that expansion areas in addition to the Lawtons are being requested as the developer does not want to be continually applying for approvals and that Cadillac Fairview, the property owner, is assuming responsibility for the required right turn lane from the previous agreement. The Committee also received one letter expressing concerns about the proposal. A copy of this letter is attached. At the request of the Committee, Staff responded to the items raised in the letter. Following consideration of the report, letter and presentations, the Committee adopted the staff recommendation. The Committee also approved a variance to reduce the number of required loading spaces from 13 to 10. The Planning Advisory Committee also confirmed that it is of the opinion that the proposed expansion to the shopping centre at 515 -519 Westmorland Road (McAllister Place) is warranted. RECOMMENDATION: That Common Council amend the Section 39 conditions imposed on the December 7, 1987 rezoning of the property located at 515 -519 Westmorland Road (McAllister Place), also identified as PID No. 00285932 as follows: a) Paragraph 1 is deleted and replaced with the following: 1. The Specific Proposal of the Developer includes an expansion of the McAllister Place Shopping Mall from its present (January 18, 2011) floor area of approximately 51,702 square metres (556,521 square feet) to a maximum floor area of approximately 57,536 square metres (619,315 square feet), together with parking facilities for approximately 2630 vehicles. These floor areas are the total building floor area and not Gross Leasable Area. b) Paragraph 3.(A) (i) is deleted and replaced with the following: 3.(A) (i) Design and construct at its own expense, a separate right turn lane on the Consumers Drive (westbound approach) at the intersection with Westmorland Road, or provide security in the form and amount acceptable to the City to cover the design and construction costs, prior the issuance of any building permits for the proposed expansion. Should the developer choose to provide the security, construction of the right turn lane must be completed by December 31, 2011. c) Paragraph 9 is deleted and replaced with the following: 9. The Developer expressly agrees and understands that notwithstanding any provision of the City's Building By -Laws or any statutory, by -law or regulatory provision to the contrary, the Building Inspector shall not issue a building permit to the 121 -3- Developer for work directly connected with the expansion of the shopping centre structure, nor shall the Developer be entitled to such a permit unless and until: (A) The developer provides an engineering water and sewer analysis determining the impact of the development on the existing infrastructure, and a detailed engineering servicing plan for the approval of the Chief City Engineer or his designate; (B) The developer provides adequate site drainage facilities in accordance with a detailed drainage plan / report, prepared by the developer and subject to the approval of the Chief City Engineer or his designate. This report must also determine the impact this development will have on the existing storm sewer infrastructure and also to ensure that this proposal does not exceed the current capacity of the existing storm system; (C) The Developer provide a detailed site and building elevation plans, subject to the approval of the Development Officer for the proposed expansions indicating the location of all buildings, parking areas, driveways, loading areas, signs, exterior lighting, exterior building materials and finishes, landscaped areas (including location and types of planting materials) and other site features; (D) The Developer provide a landscaping plan subject to the approval of the Development Officer showing plantings along the Consumers Drive frontage between the two existing entrances on Consumers Drive; and (E) That the approved plans mentioned in conditions (A) through (D) above must be attached to the application for the building permit for the development, except that such plans are not required for permit applications for site preparation and/or foundation only; and that the work shown on these approved plans must be completed within one year of the issuance of the building permit for the first component of the proposed expansion. (F)That the developer prepare a plan showing proposed circulation improvements in the portion of the site adjacent to Westmorland Road between the signalized entrance and Sobeys, between the northern McAllister Drive Entrance and the internal intersection at the northeast corner of Zellers, and within the parking area between Zellers and Sears and that this plan be subject to the approval of the Development Officer and the Chief City Engineer or his designate. Preparation of the plan and completion of the work shown on it must be completed prior to issuance of a building permit beyond the first 2325 square metres (25,000 square feet) of the proposed expansion. 122 Respectfully submitted, 6-'� Colin Murray Chairman ►f Project No. 10 -431 -4- 123 DATE: JANUARY 14, 2011 TO: PLANNING ADVISORY COMMITTEE FROM: COMMUNITY PLANNING • PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT FOR: MEETING OF JANUARY 18, 2011 PREPARED BY: REVIEWED BY: Mark Reade, P. Eng., MCIP, RPP Ken Forest, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner Commissioner SUBJECT: Name of Applicant: Anderson Architect Limited Name of Owner: The Cadillac Fairview Corporation Limited Location: 515 -519 Westmorland Road (McAllister Place) PID: 00285932 Municipal Plan: Regional Centre Coning: "SC" Shopping Centre Proposal: To amend the existing Section 39 agreement to permit an expansion to the existing shopping centre. Type of Application; Section 39 Amendment and a variance to reduce the number of loading spaces from the requirement of 13 to 10. lr SAINT JOHN P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, NB Canada E2L 40 1 wwwsaingohn.ca I C.P. 1971 Saint John, N. -B. Canada E2L 4L1 124 Anderson Architect Limited Page 2 515 -519 Westmorland Road (McAllister Place) January 14, 2011 JURISDICTION OF COMMITTEE: Common Council has requested the Planning Advisory Committee's input regarding the proposed amendments to the Section 39 agreement. Common Council will consider the Committee's recommendation at a public hearing on Monday, January 312011. The Community Planning Act authorizes the Planning Advisory Committee to grant reasonable variances from the requirements of the Zoning By -law. The Committee can impose conditions. STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO COMMITTEE: 1. That the Planning Advisory Committee confirm that it is of the opinion that the proposed expansion to the shopping centre at 515 -519 Westmorland Road (McAllister Place) is warranted. 2. That Common Council amend the Section 39 conditions imposed on the December 7, 1987 rezoning of the property located at 515 -519 Westmorland Road (McAllister Place), also identified as PID No. 00285932 as follows; a) Paragraph 1 is deleted and replaced with the following: 1. The Specific Proposal of the Developer includes an expansion of the McAllister Place Shopping Mall from its present (January 18, 2011) floor area of approximately 51,702 square metres (556,521 square feet) to a maximum floor area of approximately 57,536 square metres (619,315 square feet), together with parking facilities for approximately 2630 vehicles. These floor areas are the total building floor area and not Gross Leasable Area. b) Paragraph 3.(A) (i) is deleted and replaced with the following: 3.(A) (i) Design and construct at its own expense, a separate right turn lane on the Consumers Drive (westbound approach) at the intersection with Westmorland Road, or provide security in the form and amount acceptable to the City to cover the design and construction costs, prior the issuance of any building permits for the proposed expansion. Should the developer choose to provide the security, construction of the right turn lane must be completed by December 31, 2011. c) Paragraph 9 is deleted and replaced with the following: 9. The Developer expressly agrees and understands that notwithstanding any provision of the City's Building By -Laws or any statutory, by -law or regulatory provision to the contrary, the Building Inspector shall not issue a building permit to the Developer for work directly connected with the expansion of the shopping centre structure, nor shall the Developer be entitled to such a permit unless and until: (A) The developer provides an engineering water and sewer analysis determining the impact of the development on the existing infrastructure, and a detailed engineering servicing plan for the approval of the Chief City Engineer or his designate; 125 Anderson Architect Limited Page 3 515 -519 Westmorland Road (McAllister Place) January 14, 2011 (B) The developer provides adequate site drainage facilities in accordance with a detailed drainage plan / report, prepared by the developer and subject to the approval of the Chief City Engineer or his designate. This report must also determine the impact this development will have on the existing storm sewer infrastructure and also to ensure that this proposal does not exceed the current capacity of the existing storm system; (C) The Developer provide a detailed site and building elevation plans, subject to the approval of the Development Officer for the proposed expansions indicating the location of all buildings, parking areas, driveways, loading areas, signs, exterior lighting, exterior building materials and finishes, landscaped areas (including location and types of planting materials) and other site features; (D) The Developer provide a landscaping plan subject to the approval of the Development Officer showing plantings along the Consumers Drive frontage between the two existing entrances on Consumers Drive; and (E) That the approved plans mentioned in conditions (A) through (D) above must be attached to the application for the building permit for the development, except that such plans are not required for permit applications for site preparation and/or foundation only; and that the work shown on these approved plans must be completed within one year of the issuance of the building permit for the first component of the proposed expansion. (F) That the developer prepare a plan showing proposed circulation improvements in the portion of the site adjacent to Westmorland Road between the signalized entrance and Sobeys, between the northern McAllister Drive Entrance and the internal intersection at the northeast comer of Zellers, and within the parking area between Zellers and Sears and that this plan be subject to the approval of the Development Officer and the Chief City Engineer or his designate. Preparation of the plan and completion of the work shown on it must be completed prior to issuance of a building permit beyond the first 2325 square metres (25,000 square feet) of the proposed expansion. 3. That the Planning Advisory Committee grant a variance to reduce the number of required loading spaces from 13 to 10, BACKGROUND: The original McAllister Place development was built in the 1970s and was placed in the "SC" Shopping Centre zone in the mid -1980s as part of a City -wide program to create a specific zone for large -scale commercial developments located outside of the Uptown. At that time, the mall contained a floor area of approximately 211,000 square feet. In 1987 a major expansion of the mall was proposed and the owner applied to rezone the balance of its lands to "SC" in order to accommodate the expansion. The proposed expansion was to be composed of approximately 240,000 square feet of additional floor space, resulting in a total floor area of 451,000 square feet. The rezoning was approved, subject to a detailed Section 39 agreement dealing with site development, municipal services and street and intersection improvements in the vicinity of the site. 126 Anderson Architect Limited Page 4 515-519 Westmorland Road (McAllister Place) January 14 2011 , The mall was ultimately expanded to approximately 411,000 square feet and opened in August of 1989. An expansion of the former K -mart in 1993 added another 21,500 square feet to the development, bringing the mall to a total floor area of approximately 432,500 square feet. In January of 1993 the Committee and Council considered an application to amend the Section 39 agreement by deleting the requirement to provide continuous concrete curbs in the parking area. At that time it was noted that there were other outstanding issues with respect to the mall expansion, including the widening of Mark Drive and sanitary sewer easements. The application was tabled. In October of 1994 the Committee and Council considered an application to amend the Section 39 agreement to permit the mall to be expanded by up to 200,000 square feet, to a total of approximately 651,000 square feet. As recommended by staff and the Committee, Council approved the proposal in principle, pending the completion of detailed studies with respect to the retail market, traffic and storm water management issues. Rather than proceed with the proposal, the applicant decided to proceed with a much smaller expansion of the mall, consisting of a new Sobeys store only, which would increase the maximum size of the mall by only 27,000 square feet (to 478,000 square feet). Council approved this change in May of 1995 and the new Sobeys store was completed. In 1996, the mall's owner resubmitted a request for approval of an expansion of up to 200,000 square feet of additional floor area. On January 23, 1996 the Planning Advisory Committee recommended that Common Council authorize City staff to work with the applicant to prepare specific amendments to the existing development agreement, to permit a mall expansion and construction of a new roadway, based on detailed studies to be provided by the applicant with respect to traffic and stormwater management. This recommendation was adopted by Common Council at their meeting of January 29, 1996. The Planning Advisory Committee approved signage variances on May 28, 1996 with respect to the area of facia signage for the Toys R Us store to allow for 2- 36.4 square metre facia signs and on August 9, 2005 with respect to the height, area and tenant panels on the freestanding signs for the shopping centre. INPUT FROM OTHER SOURCES: Municipal Operations and Engineering has the following comments regarding the proposed Section 3 9 Amendment: • Water, sanitary and storm is available — grades must be verified by the developer's engineering consultant. • It is not clear from the proposal how the buildings are to be serviced. Detailed engineering drawings must be submitted to the City for review and approval. • The developer's engineering consultant must provide a detailed site drainage plan/report indicating how storm water collection and disposal will be handled; additionally, the consultant must determine the impact this development will have on the existing storm sewer infrastructure and also to ensure that this proposal does not exceed the current capacity of the existing storm system. • The developer's engineering consultant must ensure that the existing water system is of sufficient quantity and pressure for the proposed development. 127 Anderson Architect Limited Page 5 5 15-5 19 Westmorland Road (McAllister PIace) January 14, 2011 • The developer's engineering consultant must ensure that the existing sanitary sewer is capable of receiving the anticipated peak flows. Buildings and Inspection Services have no concerns with the proposal at this time. The detailed plans for the development will be examined once they are received and the department may have comments, at that time, for the developer and/or Architect. Saint John Fire Department has reviewed the proposal as it relates to the above - mentioned application for a proposed Section 39 Amendment. The Fire Department has no objection to this application provided that all street and building construction are conducted in accordance with the National Building Code and National Fire Code. Saint John Police Force has been informed of the proposal. Saint John Transit notes McAllister Place is a major connection point and destination for Saint John Transit. The proposed changes would have no impact on their current operation at this location. N.B. Department of Environment has been informed of the proposal. Saint John Energy has been informed of the proposal. Bell Aliant has been informed of the proposal. Rogers has been informed of the proposal. Maritimes & Northeast Pipeline, Enbridge Gas and Brunswick Pipeline have been informed of the proposal. Maritimes & Northeast Pipeline and Brunswick Pipeline advise this area is clear and work will not be occurring near their facilities ANALYSIS: Subject Site and Proposed Development The McAllister Place mall is a major component of an established regional shopping area centred on the intersection of Westmorland Road and McAllister Drive. The mall property extends from Westmorland Road and Consumers Drive to McAllister Drive and contains an area of approximately 31 hectares (77 acres). The existing development occupies the westerly half to two- thirds of the subject site. The balance of the property consists of a low -lying area adjacent to Consumers Drive and a wooded hill rising toward McAllister - Drive. The proponent has applied for an amendment to the 1988 development agreement (as amended in 1995), which, if approved, would permit the mall to have a maximum floor area of approximately 57,536 square metres (619,315 square feet). The development agreement currently limits the size of the mall to a maximum floor area of approximately 44,407 square metres (478,000 square feet). The mall currently has a floor area of approximately 51,507 square metres (556,521 square feet). Expansion beyond the threshold contained in the agreement occurred as a result of a misunderstanding between total floor area and gross leasable area. The agreement will be amended to refer to total floor area to clarify this matter. 128 Anderson Architect Limited Page 6 515 -519 Westmorland Road (McAllister Place) January 14, 2011 The proponent indicates that the proposed 5,900 square metre expansion will take place in phases, with the first phase occurring in the northeastern portion of the building at the existing entrance by the mall management office. This component of the expansion will include the relocation of an existing drugstore tenant and will have space for a medical clinic on a second storey. Work on this component of the expansion is slated to proceed once the Section 39 Agreement is amended. The other expansion areas will serve retail tenants and restaurants that require exterior facades and access and will occur as demand warrants. The attached plan shows the proposed expansion locations. The specific section of the development agreement which the proponent is requesting to amend is Section 1 concerning the size of the proposal. From a review of the 1998 agreement, the work associated with a right turn lane on the Consumers Drive approach to the Consumers Drive / Westmorland Road intersection has yet to be completed, although no timeline for its completion was specified in the agreement. Copies of the original agreement and the 1995 amendment are attached to this report. Surrounding Area The surrounding area is largely commercial and is zoned Shopping Centre and contains various retail establishments. In addition, lands within the area zoned "I -1" Light Industrial zoned also contain retail and other uses such as automobile and truck dealerships. Residential areas are separated from the development site by Consumers Drive and other retail uses within the surrounding area. Municipal Plan Direction The subject site is located within the McAllister Regional Centre designated by the Municipal Plan. The Plan notes this area has become the primary focus for department store type merchandise and personal services within the City and Region. The intent of this designation under the Plan is to cluster commercial uses providing a variety of goods in an area. The Municipal Plan contains a specific policy with respect to the total City -wide network of commercial retail centres and the potential for establishment or expansion of these shopping centres. The policy is based on the need to maintain a consistent relationship between the various shopping centres in the region. Section 2.4.5.3 of the Plan provides that, where an application is made for the establishment or enlargement of a shopping centre, it is a policy of the City to ensure that: "the shopping centre proposed is of a size and nature that is in the opinion of the Planning Commission [now Planning Advisory Committee] warranted on the basis of a survey to be carried out by or for the applicant of the population and location and type of other commercial establishment within the anticipated trading area and the City as a whole" As a result of deliberations during the 1996 expansion proposal, the Planning Advisory Committee recommended that the requirement for the market study be waived and the requirement for a market study was not part of the specific recommendation adopted by Common Council. With respect to the existing application, the applicant has provided a market summary relating to the anticipated amount and timing of the uptake of the expansion areas. Staff is of the opinion this meets the intent of the Market Study requirement of the Municipal Plan. Staff is also of the opinion that the expanded use meets the intent of the Regional Centre designation of the Municipal Plan. 129 Anderson Architect Limited Page 7 515 -519 Westmorland Road (McAllister Place) January 14, 2011 Zoning By -law Considerations The proposed expansion meets the requirements of the zoning by -law for the "SC" Shopping Centre zone and the general requirements of the zoning by -law with the exception of the loading space requirements. The variance for the number of loading spaces is discussed in more detail in the following section of the report. A total of 2628 parking spaces will be provided following the expansion which will exceed the required parking of 2055 spaces under the zoning by -law. Requested Variances A variance is required to reduce the number of loading spaces from the zoning by -law requirement of 13 to 10. Loading docks are currently provided at Sobeys, Sears, Toys R Us and Zellers with an additional loading dock to be provided at the expansion for the drugstore. Staff estimate the existing and proposed loading docks can accommodate 10 loading spaces based on vehicles observed during the site visit. The smaller retail stores in the mall have external doors for receiving deliveries at the rear of the store that can be accessed by the circulation lanes at the mall. Staff are of the opinion that this arrangement meets the intent of the by -law and support the reduction in loading spaces from 13 to 10. Traffic and Site Circulation Since 1996, Mark Drive (now Consumers Drive) has been realigned, improving traffic flow in the area of the shopping centre. This allowed for a roadway bypass around the existing area of residential development on Mark Drive. Although the completion of a traffic impact study was a requirement of the 1996 expansion proposal, Staff are of the opinion that the off -site traffic impacts generated by the expansion that is currently proposed will not result in significant impacts on the adjacent roadway network. Planning staff estimate the current expansion proposal will generate 18 net new trips in the Weekday AM Peak Hour (11 enter, 7 exit) and 96 net new trips in the Weekday PM Peak Hour (47 enter, 49 exit) and that these volumes do not warrant the preparation of a traffic impact study. The construction of a separate right -hand turn lane on the northwest bound Mark Drive intersection approach (now Consumers Drive) at the Westmorland Road intersection was recommended in the 1987 traffic impact analysis conducted for the 1988 mall expansion. Section 3 of the existing development agreement indicates that the developer is responsible for this work, but no completion date was included. To date, this work has not been completed. Staff recommend that the existing Section 39 Agreement be amended to require the completion of the right turn lane prior to the issuance of any building permits for the proposed expansion or to require an appropriate financial security and completion of the work by a set deadline. A condition of the 1988 Section 39 Agreement required curbing along the Westmorland Road entrance into the mall parking area in front of Sears, along the "collector lanes" within the parking areas, along the entrance from Consumers Drive., and along the outside edges of the parking lot to provide separation hbetween the landscaped and paved areas. In 1993, the mall owners, Tritor Developments, applied to ave the Section 39 Agreement amended to delete the requirements for cast -in -place concrete curbs in these areas. City Staff had originally requested cast in place concrete curbs, however information was provided by the owner of the mall regarding the potential for differential settlement and its long -term effect on cast -in -place curbing in the parking area. Information contained in the 1996 Planning Advisory Report indicated cast -in -place concrete curbing was no- longer recommended. 130 Anderson Architect Limited Page 8 515 -519 Westmorland Road (McAllister Place) January 14, 2011 In reviewing the site plan for the Development, there are areas where better delineation can be provided for traffic movements in the parking area. These include north -south movements in the area adjacent to Westmorland Road between the signalized entrance and Sobeys, north -south movements between the northern McAllister Drive Entrance and the internal intersection at the northeast corner of Zeller's, and within the parking area between Zellers and Sears. Staff recommend that a condition be added to the Section 39 Agreement requiring implementation of these improvements prior to issuance of a building permit beyond the first 2325 square metres (25,000 square feet) of the proposed expansion. Storm Water Management and Servicing The subject site is located south of the Marsh Creek Flood Risk Area, however, it is located within the drainage area of Majors Brook which flows into the Flood Risk Area, past Morland Trailer Park and under Rothesay Avenue and eventually into Marsh Creek east of Ashburn Lake Road. The applicant has been working with a consultant to explore the possibility of modifying or expanding the wetland on the property at the rear of the mall in order to reduce the flood risk to the rear access road, parking lots and mall entrance, A preliminary study and design and have been completed and the applicant's consultant has been working with NBDENV and City engineering staff regarding implementation of the design. It is the understanding of City Staff that the current design being explored is an expansion to or creation of a larger wetland area to achieve reduced flooding in the parking area during intense rainfall and storm events. Detailed engineering drawings showing how the expansion will be serviced and any required servicing changes must be submitted to the City for review and approval. A detailed site drainage plan and report is also required along with a review that the existing sanitary sewer and water supply systems in the area can support the proposed expansion. It is recommended that these conditions be added to the Section 39 Agreement. Building Design, Landscaping Building elevation drawings for the first component of the expansion have been provided and are attached to the report. The proposed expansion includes an increased emphasis on facade materials and the design of building entrances. In order to ensure that the final design of the expansion is of a high quality, it is recommended that Section 39 conditions incorporate the normal site development requirements imposed on such Iarge- scale projects. This would include submission of detailed site and building elevation plans to the Development Officer for approval. Staff recommend that a condition be added to the Section 39 Agreement requiring these drawings. Since completion of the previous expansions to the shopping centre, the community's expectations have changed with respect to landscaping and building facades and elevations of retail developments. When compared with more recent shopping centre developments in the area, the exterior appearance and landscaping is clearly lacking and the proposed expansion provides the opportunity for the developer to address this. Landscaping improvements have been completed along the Westmorland Road frontage since 1989 that have included deciduous trees and planting beds at mall entrance intersections along Westmorland Road. Deciduous trees were also planted along the Consumers Drive frontage between Westmorland Road and 131 Anderson Architect Limited Page 9 515 -519 Westmorland Road (McAllister Place) January 14 2011 the western Consumers Drive entrance. Staff recommend that the Section 39 Agreement be amended to include the provision that a landscaping plan be prepared showing plantings along the Westmorland Road frontage between the two existing entrances on Consumers Drive and that this plan be subject to the approval of the Development Officer. Staff also recommend a condition that the work shown on this landscaping plan be completed within one year of the issuance of the building permit for the first component of the proposed expansion. CONCLUSION: The applicant is proposing a major expansion to the region's largest shopping centre. McAllister Place is an appropriate location for further shopping centre development and the requested amendment to the .Section 39 conditions to permit the increased total floor area is supported. An additional Section 39 condition is recommended regarding the timing of the right turn lane construction from the previous agreement. Section 39 conditions are also recommended regarding site servicing and drainage plans, parking lot circulation improvements, and detailed building elevation and landscaping plans. MR Project No. 10 -431 132 133 U= gg} i I� � �5 J �•� m � 6� �$ mR� dHHHHHNHf�f ' O rr�HHINfNHNNHMNNM HNHHH}HNHHMNNNHHHI�' � HNHNHH}tHNfflfflHll��1N1 � ��� "WON""" NHHHNHHININHiliMfH{NI WHOMM No"" O O � m�fAG dkMNNlIlHHUI O nHHHiMHHHINNNHkNf HNHHH(lNiINIHHIHMHHI�f t 1HHNHHHINNH�IHIfHIIHNMM � ��� ' 4 BNHIHNNNHHIHHNlHINNNNM HHHfflfEiillIHIHHHEHNHIHHM Room" a om mmommm" OrOb �� 3 134 R A a� 111[111111111 ! 111111 ■■■.. ■■mm■�.n�:.. ■ ■■■nu■■■ f 01, O 40 O • a nHMIMNMHNHkMNM - -- � NfMNiMAIMNNHNHMWf9 I ; lNf�iMMHHMMMl�4HHM I , RAiiNHIHHHI HHIH /° rt I Mm!MHN{jjiiMMm!!I!I Hp 4 HH� MIMMMMMlilNHMMMHIM MMMMMMIfi�iNNMMMiM HNMMNNMM[iilifMNHMIM NHHMMHHMMMI�EilMNHH !MlINMMHfMMMNMIHHM I HHi�IM+MNIMMMMHI�IM j NHIfHNHMINNA fL. 135 1 I ME O° ` 0 i i 0 t 1 J M-- - m- - o-- Q�- Er o— — o— - - - S r- P f�1 -_ L— �1 I ®— s o-- 136 U � N �. 41 .ti f I y� 3 � 4 rr ra mo— 8 J i O— � Y s N o-- °- S 1966 A6R�tEU-r THIS AGREEMENT made in duplicate this 160'4 day of February, A.D., 1988. BY AND BETWEEN: Beglstry Office County of Saint ?ohrt This Instrument has been compared with reSO03 to the date, and the names of the parties ony With the purported origi ^I thereof which w3! Registered as numb 7� book &90—on th-22—K—day o 19L° TRITOR DEVELOPMENTS LIMITED, a body corporate, having its head office in the City of Toronto, in the Province of Ontario, hereinafter called the "DEVELOPER" OF THE FIRST PART - and - ,THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN, a body corporate, in the County of Saint John and Province of New Brunswick, hereinafter called the "CITY" OF THE SECOND PART WHEREAS the Developer represents itself to be the owner in fee simple of land in the City of Saint John with front&Ces on McAllister Drive,, Westmorland Road and Mark Drive, which land is hereinafter referred to as the "Lands" as shown outlined in red on the plan annexed hereto and forming a part hereof as Schedule 'A "; and WHEREAS the Developer has submitted to the City a specific proposal for the development of the Lands, which development would expand the existing shopping centre known as McAllister Place to create a Regional Shopping Facility; and WHEREAS the Developer in conjunction with the said specific proposal has applied to the City to have that portion of the Lands outlined in blue on the said Schedule "A" rezoned from I -] (Light Industrial) and.IR (Restricted Industrial) to SC (Shopping Centre) in order to permit the specific proposal; and WHEREAS the Developer has proposed in accordance with Section 101 of the Community Planning Act the establishment of conditions upon the specific proposal which conditions are contained herein; and WHEREAS the City by resolution of December 7, 1987 has expressed a preparedness to acceed to the Developer's rezoning request, subject to the terms and conditions which the City has imposed pursuant to Section 39 of the COmmunitY P.1anning Act and which are contained herein; 137 - 2 - NOW THEREFORE THIS INDENTURE WITNESSETH. that in consideration of these presents the rezoning applied for by the Developer and the terms, conditions and covenants contained herein, the parties hereto agree each with the other as follow: 1. The Specific Proposal of the Developer includes an expansion of the McAllister Place Shopping Mall from its present floor area of approximately 211,000 square feet to a floor area of approximately 451,000 square feet. The expansion is composed of approximately: (1) A 131,000 square foot Sears Department Store; (2) A 28,000 square foot additional food store space; (3) An 80,000 square foot general retail addition; and (4) Parking for 2750 cars. Road Works 2. The City shall: (A) Design and construct at its own expense, additional traffic lanes and transit bus laybys on Westmorland Road between Mark Drive and McAllister Drive with separate left turn lanes as in the City's opinion are required. (B) Design and construct an additional through lane having a maximum length of 200 feet on each of the northern, southern and eastern approach to the intersection of McAllister Drive and Westmorland Road, where in the City's opinion such additional lane is required. (C) Use its best efforts to complete the Road Works described in subparagraphs 2(A) and (B) hereof not later than July 1, 1989 or thirty (30) days prior to the opening of the expanded shopping centre, whichever date is later. (D) Consult with the Developer's engineer during the course of the design of the Road Works described in subparagraphs 2(A) and (B) hereof, provided however, 138 - 3 - that should disagreement be revealed during such consulation that the City's position shall prevail. 3. The Developer shall: (A) (i) Design and construct at its own expense a separate right hand turn lane on Mark Drive at the intersection with Westmorland Road. (ii) Design and construct the work described in Clause 3(A)(i) hereof in accordance with standards which are to be established solely in the discretion of the City's Chief Engineer. (B) (i) Deliver to the City a deed or deeds in registerable fora conveying to the City fee simple title to any of the Developer's property which is required in connection with the execution of the Work described in subparagraphs 2(A), (B) and 3(A) hereof. The Developer expressly acknowledges and agrees that the location and extent of such property will be determined solely by the City's Chief Engineer after consultation with the Developer's engineer. (ii) Deliver to the City the deed or deeds referred to in Clause 3(B)(i) hereof within fourteen (14) calendar days of the City's giving notice to the Developer of the filing in the Saint John Registry Office of the relevant subdivision plan or plans. (iii) Promptly sign any subdivision plan of its property prepared by the City in order to identify the Developer's land which in the City's opinion are required in conjunction with the execution of the Road Works described in paragraph 2 and subparagraph 3(A) hereof. (C) Reimburse the City 25% of the cost to the City of constructing the Road Work described in subparagraph 139 - 4 - 2(B) hereof including the cost of acquiring the land therefor, which amount shall not be less than $37,500.00. Such reimbursement shall be made by certified cheque delivered to the Commissioner of Finance not later than thirty (30) days following the City's advising the Developer in writing of the completion of the said Road Work identified in this subparagraph. (D) Pay to the City interest upon 2S% of the cost incurred by the City pursuant to subparagraph 2(B) hereof and which shall apply to the period of time between the City's actually incurring the aforesaid cost and the reimbursement by the Developer pursuant to the said subparagraph 3(C). Such interest shall be payable by certified cheque delivered to the City's Commissioner of Finance at the tine of the'said reimbursement. Sanitary Sewer System 4. The Developer shall: (A) Construct a replacement for the existing sewer treatment facility on Mark Drive. The replacement system shall consist of either a system of gravity sewers or a system of gravity sewers, pumping station and forcemaina and in either case shall discharge into the Marsh Creek gravity trunk sewer at Rockwood Avenue. The replacement system shall be subject to the provisions of subparagraph 5(C) hereof, capable of handling all flows able to be- handled by the existing sewerage treatment facility on Mark Drive together with all those anticipated from the proposed expansion of the shopping centre. The determination of flows anticipated from the proposed shopping centre expansion shall be made jointly by the City and the Developer's engineering consultants. The construction of the replacement system shall occur in compliance with all applicable by -laws, statutory and regulatory provisions, including without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the City's Flood Risk Area By -Law. (B) Undertake the design and construction of the system described in subparagraph (A) hereof entirely at its 140 4 - S - own expense except as provided for in subparagraph 6(B) hereof. (C) Prepare and deliver to the City at no coat to the City: (i) a deed or deeds in registerable form conveying to the City an unencumbered easement or easements in the form customarily used by the City for the purpose of installing, constructing, operating, maintaining, repairing, replacing or otherwise altering a sanitary sever line crossing the lands of the Developer at a location mutually acceptable to the parties herein. (ii) a deed in registerable form conveying to the City fee simple title in the ,land of the Developer upon which any" pumiping- atrtion': id. constructed together with the surrounding area of a size and configuration satisfactory to the City's Chief Engineer for servicing the said pumping station as well as an unrestricted right of way from the aforesaid area to a public road. (iii) execute and deliver at its own expense to the City such other documents and assurances as the City deems appropriate to transfer to and confirm in the City the ownership of the said replacement sanitary sewerage system. (iv) deliver to the City the deeds referred to in clauses 4(c)(i) and (ii) hereof within seven (7) calendar days of the City's giving notice to the Developer of the certification by the City's Director of Engineering that the replacement sewerage system is satisfactory as constructed. (v) deliver to the City the deeds or assurances referred to in clause 4(C)(iii) hereof within seven (7) calendar days of the City's giving notice to the Developer of the need for such 141 - 6 - items. (D) Use its best efforts to complete the work described in subparagraph (A) hereof to the satisfaction of the City's Chief Engineer not later than July 1, 1989 or thirty (30) days prior to the opening of the expanded shopping centre, whichever date is later. In any event the Developer agrees to complete the replacement sanitary sewerage system not later than the 1Sth day of November, 1989. S. The Developer expressly acknowledges and agrees that: (A) The design and construction of the said replacement sewerage system whether that described in subparagraph 4(A) or S(C) hereof shall be in accordance with the standards which are to be- established solely in.the discretion of the City; _ (B) That the Developer shall neither commence nor permit the commencement of construction of the said replacement sewerage system without the City's Chief Engineer having first approved in writing the detailed design thereof; (C) That the Developer shall design and construct the replacement sewerage system to s capacity greater than that described in subparagraph 4(A) hereof if required to do so by the City, provided however that the City must give notice to the Developer of the City's requirement hereunder within 14 calendar days of the Developer's submitting a preliminary design of the said replacement system to the City's Chief Engineer; (D) It must not interfere in any way with the continuing operation of the Mark Drive sewerage treatment facility without first receiving written permission to do so from the City's Chief Engineer. 6. The City shall: (A) Reimburse the Developer for the difference between the coat of designing and constructing a replacement sanitary sewerage system having capacity described in 142 subparagaph 4(A) hereof and one of greater capacity as referred to in subparagraph S(C) hereof. The said reimbursement shall be made by certified cheque delivered to the Developer not later than thirty (30) days following the later: (i) the certification in writing by the City's Director of Engineering of the acceptability of the replacement system as constucted; ti the delivery to the City of a Registrar's Certificate confirmng there are no outstanding Mechanics' Liens affecting the property; a Statutory Declaration to the effect that all expenses incurred by the Developer in designing and constructing the replacement sewerage system have been paid; (iv) a clearance certificate by the Worker's Compensation Board. (B) Acquire at its own expense any easement which is necessary for the purpose of installing, constructing, operating,, maintaining, repairing, replacing or otherwise altering the said replacement sanitary Beverage system. Pay to the Developer interest upon the amount described in subparagraph 6(A) hereof which shall be calculated at Prime Interest rate (as established by the Sank of Montreal from time to time) plus 1% and which shall apply from the period of time between the Developer's actually incurring the aforesaid expense and the reimbursement by the City in subparagraph 6(A) hereof. Such interest shall be payable by certified cheque to the Developer at the time of reimbursement pursuant to subparagraph 6(A) hereof. Storm Water Storage System 7. The Developer shall: 143 7 _ subparagaph 4(A) hereof and one of greater capacity as referred to in subparagraph S(C) hereof. The said reimbursement shall be made by certified cheque delivered to the Developer not later than thirty (30) days following the later: (i) the certification in writing by the City's Director of Engineering of the acceptability of the replacement system as constucted; ti the delivery to the City of a Registrar's Certificate confirmng there are no outstanding Mechanics' Liens affecting the property; a Statutory Declaration to the effect that all expenses incurred by the Developer in designing and constructing the replacement sewerage system have been paid; (iv) a clearance certificate by the Worker's Compensation Board. (B) Acquire at its own expense any easement which is necessary for the purpose of installing, constructing, operating,, maintaining, repairing, replacing or otherwise altering the said replacement sanitary Beverage system. Pay to the Developer interest upon the amount described in subparagraph 6(A) hereof which shall be calculated at Prime Interest rate (as established by the Sank of Montreal from time to time) plus 1% and which shall apply from the period of time between the Developer's actually incurring the aforesaid expense and the reimbursement by the City in subparagraph 6(A) hereof. Such interest shall be payable by certified cheque to the Developer at the time of reimbursement pursuant to subparagraph 6(A) hereof. Storm Water Storage System 7. The Developer shall: 143 - e - 0. (A) Design, construct and maintain exclusively at its own expense a storm water storage system for the Lands approved by the City's Chief Engineer. (B) Devise a plan designating snow storage areas for the expanded shopping centre which is acceptable to the City and the Developer further expressly agrees to conform to such a plan. Hater_ Supply S. It is expressly agreed and understood that all connections to the City water mains shall be supervised by appropriate City employees and shall occur at the sole expense of the Developer which shall at its own expense install the back flow preventers determined necessary by the City. Site Plan and Building Permit - ­ 9. The Developer expressly agrees and understands that notwithstanding any provision of the City's Building By -Laws or any statutory, by -law or regulatory provision to the contrary, the Building Inspector shall not issue a building permit to the Developer for work directly connected with the expansion of the shopping centre structure, nor shall the Developer be entitled to such a permit unless and until; (A) The City's Director of Engineering has approved in writing the sanitary sewer replacement system referred to in paragraph J hereof; (B) A site plan illustrating; (i) the location upon the Lands of the proposed building expansion and parking lot layout is approved in writing by the City's Director of Planning; the curoing provisions within the area are outlined in red on the said Schedule "A" are approved in writing by the City's Director of Planning; 144 c - 9 - the standard of construction of internal access roads within the area outlined in red on the said Schedule "A" is approved in writing by the City's Chief Engineer; (iv) the location of the Loop Road and its relationship to the shopping area as expanded and truck loading area is approved by the City's Director of Planning; (v) the treatment of the transition area between the expanded shopping centre structure and paved areas is approved by the City's Director of Planning; (vi) the detailed landscaping plan for the area outlined in red on said Schedule "A" is acceptable to the City's Director of Planning; and (vii) details of underground electrical servicing of the proposed shopping centre, expansion is approved by the City's Director of Planning. (C) A Performance Bond or security in another form acceptable to the City's Cosimissioner of Finance securing the due performance by the Developer of its obligations under paragraphs 3, 4, and ] hereof is delivered to the City. If acceptable security is provided in a form other than a bond, it shall remain in full force and effect until the 31st day of December, 1989. Occupancy 10, The Developer expressly agrees and understands that it shall not occupy nor shall it allow the occupation of the expanded shopping mall structure notwithstanding any by -law or statutory provision to the contrary, until the City's Chief Engineer has certified in writing that in his opinion the replacement sanitary sewerage system as constructed is acceptable and also that the storm water storage system as constructed is acceptable. 145 i •' H �. - \ 10 11. The Developer shall immediately following third reading of the requested rezoning apply to the Lieutenant - Governor -in- Countil or other appropriate New Brunswick Provincial Authority for permission to expand the shopping centre as outlined herein. The City, if requested by the Developer, agrees to express to the Province its support of the Developer's application. Notice 12. Any notice or advice which is to be given under this agreement shall be deemed to have been satisfactorily given to the Developer if delivered personally or by prepaid registered mail addressed to Mr. Brian M. Mosher of the law firm Mosher Chedore, and to the City if delivered personally or by prepaid mail addressed to Mary L. Munford, Common Clerk of the City. In the event of notice by prepaid mail the notice will be deemed to have been received four (4) days following its posting. Reasonableness 13• Both parties agree to act reasonably in connection with any natter, action, decision, consent or approval - required'*or', contemplated under this agreement. This agreement shall enure to the benefit of and be binding upon the parties hereof their successor& and assigns respectively. IN WITNESS "EREOF the parties have duly executed these presents the day and year first above written. SIGNED SEALED AND DELIVERED in the presence of: 146 TRITOR DEVELOP ENTS LIEU TED Per: / �f �--- -� X, And: / THE ITY OF SA JOHN I r Hayor ommon y¢er h�.tinsfrumanlpurporty ��_._.._._:_._,..,'_y.. •. a ___.. . �— nc•. co py of the Exetnplaire prlsentb ontme`— 11 °Cmat registered or copie conforme a !'instrument ` enre ,. 9 ou dirl�,au n the Stint John ,aunty R.ptstry' Otliec NB ,drd buweau d'enregrse_„,enl du spa% i''—y eomle de Saint John MB 13Z .�y, JUL wi "ber -numaro Daok•livre 1995 peg. THIS AMENDING AGREEMENT made in duplicate this 29th day of June, 1995. T� "z< BY AND BETWEEN: McALLISTER PLACE LIMITED,, `a body, corporate, having its head office in the pity of f"ire`�`tre "in the Province of Ontario, hereina (ter called the "DEVELOPER" OF THE FIRST PART - and - THE C.ITY OF SAINT JOHN, a body corporate, in the County of Saint John and Province of New Brunswick, hereinafter called the 'CITY' OF THE SECOND PART WHEREAS Tritor Developments Limited and the City executed an Agreement dated February 18, 1985 pursuant to Section 39 of the Community Planning Act (Chapter C -12 R.S.N.B. 1973 and amendments thereto) respecting the rezoning and development of land having frontage on McAllister Drive, Mark Drive and Westmorland Road, now commonly referred to as McAllister Place; and WHEREAS the said Agreement was recorded in the Saint John County Registry Office on February 26, 1988 as Number 344433 in Book 1270 at pages 266 following and thereby bound subsequent owners of the Land in respect of which the Agreement was made; and WHEREAS Tritor Developments Limited by Deed dated March 2, 1990 and registered in the Saint John County Registry Office on March 5, 1990 in book 1405 at page 1 following as number 360581 conveyed to McAllister Place Limited, the'Developer herein' entitled to the Land in respect of which the aforesaid Agreement was made; and WHEREAS the said Agreement contained a'specific proposal, for the development of the Land identified therein; and WHEREAS the Developer has requested that the City permit an amendment to the said 'specific proposal" so as to permit an increase in the floor area existing as of the date of this Agreement by approximately 45,000 square feet; and WHEREAS the Common Council of the City by resolution passed at an open session of Council held on the 15th day of May, 1995 resolved to accede to the Developer's request and authorized the execution of an amendment to the aforesaid Agreement; NOW THEREFORE THIS AGREEMENT WITNESSETH that the parties hereto for and in consideration of the execution of these presents agree each with the other as follows: 147 f� -2- 1. Paragraph 1 in the Agreement between these parties dated February 18, 1988 is hereby deleted and replaced with the following: 1. The Specific Proposal of the Developer includes an expansion of the McAllister Place Shopping Mall from its present (February 18, 1988) floor area of approximately 211,000 square feet to a maximum floor area of approximately 478,000 square feet, together with parking facilities for approximately 2,450 cars. 2. Except as expressly amended hereby the Agreement between the parties hereto dated February 18, 1988 remains unaltered. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have duly executed these presents the day and year first above written. SIGNED, SEALED AND DELIVERED in the presence of: McALLISTER PLACE LIMITED Per. J. . Begg And: _ ing"Poslu THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN MAYOR � C�6- COMMON 6LERK Common Council Resolution Dated May 15, 1995. 148 FIRST WESTMORLAND SHOPPPING CENTRES LIMITED 700 Applewood Crescent, Su'rte 100, Vaughan, Ontario L4K SX3 Telephone (905) 760- 6200 Fax (905) 760 -6201 -- SENT VIA EMAIL & FACSBIRE January 17, 2011 Planning Advisory . Committee The City of Saint John 8 24i� Planning and Development JAN P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, New Brunswick E2L 4L1 RE: January le, 2011 Planning Advisory Committee's Meeting Proposed Section 39 Amendment 515 -519 Westmorland Road (McAllister Place) Saint John, New Brunswick Dear Com nittee Members and to Whom It May Concern, As the owners of First Westmorland Shopping Centres, we are writing to express our concerns with respect to the Planning Advisory Committee meeting regarding the Proposed Section 39 Amendment of McAllister Place (515 -519 Westmorland Road) to allow for the construction of a proposed development expansion of approximately 5,900 square metres, being brought forward by Cadillac Fairview Corporation. We are unfortunately unable to attend the Committee meeting in person, We have reviewed the City's Community Planning & Planning and Development Department's Report to the Planning Advisory Committee (dated January 14, 2011), and rriake the following comments. We are concerned that there has not been sufficient time provided to review the staff report pertaining to this Section 39 amendment, nor was there adequate notification of this application to adjacent landowners. Though the letter was dated January 4, 2011 it was only received on January 13`h, 2011 giving very little time to review the application. Upon our review of the January 14, 2011 report we also offer the followinD cornments/concerns regarding the proposed Section 39 Amendment for the expansion of McAllister Place; • Page 5 of the Report states the applicant's development agreement currently limits the size of the mall to a maximum floor area of approximately 44,407 square metres (47$,000 sq, ft.). The mall currently has a floor area of approximately 51,507 square metres (556,521 sq. ft.), which equates to a difference of 78,521 sq. ft. (or 7,295 square metres). There appears to be a significant discrepancy and confusion related to the floor area numbers and we believe a future explanation is warranted in this regard. 149 �hry 1 cVJ11 a.wi rn rK riKJi rKU Z)MUrrINU,) fbU bdUI 1U P.03/03 FiT$t Westmorland Shopping Centres Utter to Planning Advisory Committee January 17, 2011 Municipal Plan Direction • Under the Municipal Plait Direction section, on Page 6 of the Report, it mentions that "the applicant has provided a market summary relating to the anticipated amount and timing of the uptake of the expansions areas ", and that Staff is "of the opinion this meets the intent of the Market Study requirement of the Municipal Plan ". • As also noted on page 6 of the Report, the policy of the Municipal Plan is `based on the need to maintain a consistent relationship between the various shopping centres in the region ", As owners of a nearby shopping centre in close proximity to McAllister Place, kindly advise how City Staff came to the `opinion that the market summary meets the intent of the Market Study requirement" of the Municipal Plan, as no justification (quantitative or qualitative) was provided in the report? Traffic and Site Circulation • On page 7 of the Report, the City acknowledges that "completion of a traffic impact study was a requirement of the 1996 expansion proposal [of the mall] Staff are of the opinion that the off - site traffic impacts generated by the expansion that is currently proposed will not result in significant impacts of the adjacent roadway network '. .Please advise why the provision of a Traffic Impact Analysis was waived for the applicant? Storm Water Man ement and Servicing • Page 8 of the Report mentions that a "preliminary study and design [sic] have been completed and the applicant's consultant has been working with IBDENT'V and City engineering staff regarding the implementation of the design. It is the understanding of City Staff that the current design being explored is an expansion to or creation of a larger wetland area to achieve reduced flooding in the parking area during intense rainfall and storm events. Although the provision of a satisfactory SWM design and accompanying report is a condition of approval of the proposed expansion, why is the application being approved before the storm water management re- design is finalized'? To conclude, we feel that we have not received adequate time to review the material, nor do we have answers to the questions above regarding the City staff report. As such we respectfully request that the Saint John Planning Advisory Committee defer the decision of the Section 39 amendment for McAllister Place, to until such time that we have the opportunity to review the above requested and referenced materials /reports. We trust that the enclosed is satisfactory for your use and look forward to receiving all further correspondence on this matter. Yo rs truly, urnsden Land Development Associate Cc. Robert Blacklock Ornella R.ichichi ** TOTAL PAGE.03 ** 150 January 20, 2011 Your Worship and Councillors: SUBJECT: Proposed Section 39 Amendment - 515 -519 Westmorland Road (McAllister Place) On January 4, 2011 Common Council referred the above matter to the Planning Advisory Committee for a report and recommendation. The Committee considered the attached report at its January 18, 2011 meeting. Mr. Richard Anderson, representing Anderson Architect Ltd. , the applicant, attended the meeting and advised that he was in agreement with the staff recommendation but was looking for clarification for the requirements regarding the stormwater, and water and sewer analysis required. Mark Reade responded that he discussed this with Municipal Operations and Engineering and they are in receipt of the stormwater assessment for the first phase of the development (Lawtons) and that the water and sanitary sewer analysis will deal with the additional flows for the new retail areas. Mr. Rod Adams, representing Eastpoint, appeared before the Committee and spoke in favour of the development citing the proposed expansion will provide continued retail growth in the City. Mr. Adams expressed concern with potential traffic increases, stormwater management and curbing in the parking areas. Staff and the applicant addressed Mr. Adams concerns regarding the development. David O'Brien of Barry Spalding appeared before the Committee representing the Morland Trailer Park and expressed concerns regarding site drainage and suggested changes to the proposed wording of the Section 39 Amendments. Crystal Lockerbie of 84 Simpson Drive, representing the Glen Falls Community Committee, appeared before the Committee and questioned the impacts of the development on the site and flooding. Staff responded that the paved parking area is not being enlarged and that the amount of runoff on the site will remain the same as portions of the asphalt parking area will become roofs, having the same runoff characteristics. Brian Mosher of Mosher Chedore appeared before the Committee representing the Glen Falls Community Committee and noted his concerns were covered off by the previous presentations. 151 IM Richard Anderson reappeared before the Committee and addressed the concerns raised, noting the mall is not creating the flooding problem and will not be increasing the flooding in the area. He also noted that expansion areas in addition to the Lawtons are being requested as the developer does not want to be continually applying for approvals and that Cadillac Fairview, the property owner, is assuming responsibility for the required right turn lane from the previous agreement. The Committee also received one letter expressing concerns about the proposal. A copy of this letter is attached. At the request of the Committee, Staff responded to the items raised in the letter. Following consideration of the report, letter and presentations, the Committee adopted the staff recommendation. The Committee also approved a variance to reduce the number of required loading spaces from 13 to 10. The Planning Advisory Committee also confirmed that it is of the opinion that the proposed expansion to the shopping centre at 515 -519 Westmorland Road (McAllister Place) is warranted. RECOMMENDATION: That Common Council amend the Section 39 conditions imposed on the December 7, 1987 rezoning of the property located at 515 -519 Westmorland Road (McAllister Place), also identified as PID No. 00285932 as follows: a) Paragraph 1 is deleted and replaced with the following: 1. The Specific Proposal of the Developer includes an expansion of the McAllister Place Shopping Mall from its present (January 18, 2011) floor area of approximately 51,702 square metres (556,521 square feet) to a maximum floor area of approximately 57,536 square metres (619,315 square feet), together with parking facilities for approximately 2630 vehicles. These floor areas are the total building floor area and not Gross Leasable Area. b) Paragraph 3.(A) (i) is deleted and replaced with the following: 3.(A) (i) Design and construct at its own expense, a separate right turn lane on the Consumers Drive (westbound approach) at the intersection with Westmorland Road, or provide security in the form and amount acceptable to the City to cover the design and construction costs, prior the issuance of any building permits for the proposed expansion. Should the developer choose to provide the security, construction of the right turn lane must be completed by December 31, 2011. c) Paragraph 9 is deleted and replaced with the following: 9. The Developer expressly agrees and understands that notwithstanding any provision of the City's Building By -Laws or any statutory, by -law or regulatory provision to the contrary, the Building Inspector shall not issue a building permit to the 152 -3- Developer for work directly connected with the expansion of the shopping centre structure, nor shall the Developer be entitled to such a permit unless and until: (A) The developer provides an engineering water and sewer analysis determining the impact of the development on the existing infrastructure, and a detailed engineering servicing plan for the approval of the Chief City Engineer or his designate; (B) The developer provides adequate site drainage facilities in accordance with a detailed drainage plan / report, prepared by the developer and subject to the approval of the Chief City Engineer or his designate. This report must also determine the impact this development will have on the existing storm sewer infrastructure and also to ensure that this proposal does not exceed the current capacity of the existing storm system; (C) The Developer provide a detailed site and building elevation plans, subject to the approval of the Development Officer for the proposed expansions indicating the location of all buildings, parking areas, driveways, loading areas, signs, exterior lighting, exterior building materials and finishes, landscaped areas (including location and types of planting materials) and other site features; (D) The Developer provide a landscaping plan subject to the approval of the Development Officer showing plantings along the Consumers Drive frontage between the two existing entrances on Consumers Drive; and (E) That the approved plans mentioned in conditions (A) through (D) above must be attached to the application for the building permit for the development, except that such plans are not required for permit applications for site preparation and/or foundation only; and that the work shown on these approved plans must be completed within one year of the issuance of the building permit for the first component of the proposed expansion. (F) That the developer prepare a plan showing proposed circulation improvements in the portion of the site adjacent to Westmorland Road between the signalized entrance and Sobeys, between the northern McAllister Drive Entrance and the internal intersection at the northeast corner of Zellers, and within the parking area between Zellers and Sears and that this plan be subject to the approval of the Development Officer and the Chief City Engineer or his designate. Preparation of the plan and completion of the work shown on it must be completed prior to issuance of a building permit beyond the first 2325 square metres (25,000 square feet) of the proposed expansion. 153 Respectfully submitted, Colin Murray Chairman MR Project No. 10-431 It 154 DATE: JANUARY 14, 2011 TO: PLANNING ADVISORY COMMITTEE FROM: COMMUNITY PLANNING • PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT FOR: MEETING OF JANUARY 18, 2011 PREPARED BY: REVIEWED BY: Mark Reade, P. Eng., MCIP, RPP Senior Planner SUBJECT: Name of Applicant: Name of Owner: Location: PID: Municipal Plan: Zoning: Proposal: Type of Application: Ken Forrest, MCIP, RPP Commissioner Anderson Architect Limited The Cadillac Fairview Corporation Limited 515 -519 Westmorland Road (McAllister Place) 00285932 Regional Centre "SC" Shopping Centre To amend the existing Section 39 agreement to permit an expansion to the existing shopping centre. Section 39 Amendment and a variance to reduce the number of loading spaces from the requirement of 13 to 10. 155 Anderson Architect Limited Page 2 515 -519 Westmorland Road (McAllister Place) January 14, 2011 JURISDICTION OF COMMITTEE: Common Council has requested the Planning Advisory Committee's input regarding the proposed amendments to the Section 39 agreement. Common Council will consider the Committee's recommendation at a public hearing on Monday, January 31 2011. The Community Planning Act authorizes the Planning Advisory Committee to grant reasonable variances from the requirements of the Zoning By -law. The Committee can impose conditions. STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO COMMITTEE: That the Planning Advisory Committee confirm that it is of the opinion that the proposed expansion to the shopping centre at 515 -519 Westmorland Road (McAllister Place) is warranted. 2. That Common Council amend the Section 39 conditions imposed on the December 7, 1987 rezoning of the property located at 515 -519 Westmorland Road (McAllister Place), also identified as PID No. 00285932 as follows: a) Paragraph 1 is deleted and replaced with the following: 1. The Specific Proposal of the Developer includes an expansion of the McAllister Place Shopping Mall from its present (January 18, 2011) floor area of approximately 51,702 square metres (556,521 square feet) to a maximum floor area of approximately 57,536 square metres (619,315 square feet), together with parking facilities for approximately 2630 vehicles. These floor areas are the total building floor area and not Gross Leasable Area. b) Paragraph 3.(A) (i) is deleted and replaced with the following: 3.(A) (i) Design and construct at its own expense, a separate right turn lane on the Consumers Drive (westbound approach) at the intersection with Westmorland Road, or provide security in the form and amount acceptable to the City to cover the design and construction costs, prior the issuance of any building permits for the proposed expansion. Should the developer choose to provide the security, construction of the right turn lane must be completed by December 31, 2011. c) Paragraph 9 is deleted and replaced with the following: 9. The Developer expressly agrees and understands that notwithstanding any provision of the City's Building By -Laws or any statutory, by -law or regulatory provision to the contrary, the Building Inspector shall not issue a building permit to the Developer for work directly connected with the expansion of the shopping centre structure, nor shall the Developer be entitled to such a permit unless and until: (A) The developer provides an engineering water and sewer analysis determining the impact of the development on the existing infrastructure, and a detailed engineering servicing plan for the approval of the Chief City Engineer or his designate; 156 Anderson Architect Limited 515 -519 Westmorland Road (McAllister Place) Page 3 January 14, 2011 (B) The developer provides adequate site drainage facilities in accordance with a detailed drainage plan / report, prepared by the developer and subject to the approval of the Chief City Engineer or his designate. This report must also determine the impact this development will have on the existing storm sewer infrastructure and also to ensure that this proposal does not exceed the current capacity of the existing storm system; (C) The Developer provide a detailed site and building elevation plans, subject to the approval of the Development Officer for the proposed expansions indicating the location of all buildings, parking areas, driveways, loading areas, signs, exterior lighting, exterior building materials and finishes, landscaped areas (including location and types of planting materials) and other site features; (D) The Developer provide a landscaping plan subject to the approval of the Development Officer showing plantings along the Consumers Drive frontage between the two existing entrances on Consumers Drive; and (E) That the approved plans mentioned in conditions (A) through (D) above must be attached to the application for the building permit for the development, except that such plans are not required for permit applications for site preparation and/or foundation only; and that the work shown on these approved plans must be completed within one year of the issuance of the building permit for the first component of the proposed expansion. (F) That the developer prepare a plan showing proposed circulation improvements in the portion of the site adjacent to Westmorland Road between the signalized entrance and Sobeys, between the northern McAllister Drive Entrance and the internal intersection at the northeast corner of Zellers, and within the parking area between Zellers and Sears and that this plan be subject to the approval of the Development Officer and the Chief City Engineer or his designate. Preparation of the plan and completion of the work shown on it must be completed prior to issuance of a building permit beyond the first 2325 square metres (25,000 square feet) of the proposed expansion. 3. That the Planning Advisory Committee grant a variance to reduce the number of required loading spaces from 13 to 10. BACKGROUND: The original McAllister Place development was built in the 1970s and was placed in the "SC" Shopping Centre zone in the mid -1980s as part of a City -wide program to create a specific zone for large -scale commercial developments located outside of the Uptown. At that time, the mall contained a floor area of approximately 211,000 square feet. In 1987 a major expansion of the mall was proposed and the owner applied to rezone the balance of its lands to "SC" in order to accommodate the expansion. The proposed expansion was to be composed of approximately 240,000 square feet of additional floor space, resulting in a total floor area of 451,000 square feet. The rezoning was approved, subject to a detailed Section 39 agreement dealing with site development, municipal services and street and intersection improvements in the vicinity of the site. 157 Anderson Architect Limited Page 4 515 -519 Westmorland Road (McAllister Place) January 14, 2011 The mall was ultimately expanded to approximately 411,000 square feet and opened in August of 1989. An expansion of the former K -mart in 1993 added another 21,500 square feet to the development, bringing the mall to a total floor area of approximately 432,500 square feet. In January of 1993 the Committee and Council considered an application to amend the Section 39 agreement by deleting the requirement to provide continuous concrete curbs in the parking area. At that time it was noted that there were other outstanding issues with respect to the mall expansion, including the widening of Mark Drive and sanitary sewer easements. The application was tabled. In October of 1994 the Committee and Council considered an application to amend the Section 39 agreement to permit the mall to be expanded by up to 200,000 square feet, to a total of approximately 651,000 square feet. As recommended by staff and the Committee, Council approved the proposal in principle, pending the completion of detailed studies with respect to the retail market, traffic and storm water management issues. Rather than proceed with the proposal, the applicant decided to proceed with a much smaller expansion of the mall, consisting of a new Sobeys store only, which would increase the maximum size of the mall by only 27,000 square feet (to 478,000 square feet). Council approved this change in May of 1995 and the new Sobeys store was completed. In 1996, the mall's owner resubmitted a request for approval of an expansion of up to 200,000 square feet of additional floor area. On January 23, 1996 the Planning Advisory Committee recommended that Common Council authorize City staff to work with the applicant to prepare specific amendments to the existing development agreement, to permit a mall expansion and construction of a new roadway, based on detailed studies to be provided by the applicant with respect to traffic and stormwater management. This recommendation was adopted by Common Council at their meeting of January 29, 1996. The Planning Advisory Committee approved signage variances on May 28, 1996 with respect to the area of facia signage for the Toys R Us store to allow for 2- 36.4 square metre facia signs and on August 9, 2005 with respect to the height, area and tenant panels on the freestanding signs for the shopping centre. INPUT FROM OTHER SOURCES: Municipal Operations and Engineering has the following comments regarding the proposed Section 39 Amendment: Water, sanitary and storm is available — grades must be verified by the developer's engineering consultant. It is not clear from the proposal how the buildings are to be serviced. Detailed engineering drawings must be submitted to the City for review and approval. The developer's engineering consultant must provide a detailed site drainage plan/report indicating how storm water collection and disposal will be handled; additionally, the consultant must determine the impact this development will have on the existing storm sewer infrastructure and also to ensure that this proposal does not exceed the current capacity of the existing storm system. The developer's engineering consultant must ensure that the existing water system is of sufficient quantity and pressure for the proposed development. 158 Anderson Architect Limited 515 -519 Westmorland Road (McAllister Place) Page 5 January 14, 2011 The developer's engineering consultant must ensure that the existing sanitary sewer is capable of receiving the anticipated peak flows. Buildings and Inspection Services have no concerns with the proposal at this time. The detailed plans for the development will be examined once they are received and the department may have comments, at that time, for the developer and/or Architect. Saint John Fire Department has reviewed the proposal as it relates to the above - mentioned application for a proposed Section 39 Amendment. The Fire Department has no objection to this application provided that all street and building construction are conducted in accordance with the National Building Code and National Fire Code. Saint John Police Force has been informed of the proposal. Saint John Transit notes McAllister Place is a major connection point and destination for Saint John Transit. The proposed changes would have no impact on their current operation at this location. N.B. Department of Environment has been informed of the proposal. Saint John Energy has been informed of the proposal. Bell Aliant has been informed of the proposal. Rogers has been informed of the proposal. Maritimes & Northeast Pipeline, Enbridge Gas and Brunswick Pipeline have been informed of the proposal. Maritimes & Northeast Pipeline and Brunswick Pipeline advise this area is clear and work will not be occurring near their facilities ANALYSIS: Subject Site and Proposed Development The McAllister Place mall is a major component of an established regional shopping area centred on the intersection of Westmorland Road and McAllister Drive. The mall property extends from Westmorland Road and Consumers Drive to McAllister Drive and contains an area of approximately 31 hectares (77 acres). The existing development occupies the westerly half to two - thirds of the subject site. The balance of the property consists of a low -lying area adjacent to Consumers Drive and a wooded hill rising toward McAllister Drive. The proponent has applied for an amendment to the 1988 development agreement (as amended in 1995), which, if approved, would permit the mall to have a maximum floor area of approximately 57,536 square metres (619,315 square feet). The development agreement currently limits the size of the mall to a maximum floor area of approximately 44,407 square metres (478,000 square feet). The mall currently has a floor area of approximately 51,507 square metres (556,521 square feet). Expansion beyond the threshold contained in the agreement occurred as a result of a misunderstanding between total floor area and gross leasable area. The agreement will be amended to refer to total floor area to clarify this matter. 159 Anderson Architect Limited Page 6 515 -519 Westmorland Road (McAllister Place) January 14, 2011 The proponent indicates that the proposed 5,900 square metre expansion will take place in phases, with the first phase occurring in the northeastern portion of the building at the existing entrance by the mall management office. This component of the expansion will include the relocation of an existing drugstore tenant and will have space for a medical clinic on a second storey. Work on this component of the expansion is slated to proceed once the Section 39 Agreement is amended. The other expansion areas will serve retail tenants and restaurants that require exterior facades and access and will occur as demand warrants. The attached plan shows the proposed expansion locations. The specific section of the development agreement which the proponent is requesting to amend is Section 1 concerning the size of the proposal. From a review of the 1998 agreement, the work associated with a right turn lane on the Consumers Drive approach to the Consumers Drive / Westmorland Road intersection has yet to be completed, although no timeline for its completion was specified in the agreement. Copies of the original agreement and the 1995 amendment are attached to this report. Surrounding Area The surrounding area is largely commercial and is zoned Shopping Centre and contains various retail establishments. In addition, lands within the area zoned 1- Light Industrial zoned also contain retail and other uses such as automobile and truck dealerships. Residential areas are separated from the development site by Consumers Drive and other retail uses within the surrounding area. Municipal Plan Direction The subject site is located within the McAllister Regional Centre designated by the Municipal Plan. The Plan notes this area has become the primary focus for department store type merchandise and personal services within the City and Region. The intent of this designation under the Plan is to cluster commercial uses providing a variety of goods in an area. The Municipal Plan contains a specific policy with respect to the total City -wide network of commercial retail centres and the potential for establishment or expansion of these shopping centres. The policy is based on the need to maintain a consistent relationship between the various shopping centres in the region. Section 2.4.5.3 of the Plan provides that, where an application is made for the establishment or enlargement of a shopping centre, it is a policy of the City to ensure that: "the shopping centre proposed is of a size and nature that is in the opinion of the Planning Commission [now Planning Advisory Committee] warranted on the basis of a survey to be carried out by or for the applicant of the population and location and type of other commercial establishment within the anticipated trading area and the City as a whole" As a result of deliberations during the 1996 expansion proposal, the Planning Advisory Committee recommended that the requirement for the market study be waived and the requirement for a market study was not part of the specific recommendation adopted by Common Council. With respect to the existing application, the applicant has provided a market summary relating to the anticipated amount and timing of the uptake of the expansion areas. Staff is of the opinion this meets the intent of the Market Study requirement of the Municipal Plan. Staff is also of the opinion that the expanded use meets the intent of the Regional Centre designation of the Municipal Plan. 160 Anderson Architect Limited Page 7 515 -519 Westmorland Road (McAllister Place) January 14, 2011 Zoning By -law Considerations The proposed expansion meets the requirements of the zoning by -law for the "SC" Shopping Centre zone and the general requirements of the zoning by -law with the exception of the loading space requirements. The variance for the number of loading spaces is discussed in more detail in the following section of the report. A total of 2628 parking spaces will be provided following the expansion which will exceed the required parking of 2055 spaces under the zoning by -law. Requested Variances A variance is required to reduce the number of loading spaces from the zoning by -law requirement of 13 to 10. Loading docks are currently provided at Sobeys, Sears, Toys R Us and Zellers with an additional loading dock to be provided at the expansion for the drugstore. Staff estimate the existing and proposed loading docks can accommodate 10 loading spaces based on vehicles observed during the site visit. The smaller retail stores in the mall have external doors for receiving deliveries at the rear of the store that can be accessed by the circulation lanes at the mall. Staff are of the opinion that this arrangement meets the intent of the by -law and support the reduction in loading spaces from 13 to 10. Traffic and Site Circulation Since 1996, Mark Drive (now Consumers Drive) has been realigned, improving traffic flow in the area of the shopping centre. This allowed for a roadway bypass around the existing area of residential development on Mark Drive. Although the completion of a traffic impact study was a requirement of the 1996 expansion proposal, Staff are of the opinion that the off -site traffic impacts generated by the expansion that is currently proposed will not result in significant impacts on the adjacent roadway network. Planning staff estimate the current expansion proposal will generate 18 net new trips in the Weekday AM Peak Hour (11 enter, 7 exit) and 96 net new trips in the Weekday PM Peak Hour (47 enter, 49 exit) and that these volumes do not warrant the preparation of a traffic impact study. The construction of a separate right -hand turn lane on the northwest bound Mark Drive intersection approach (now Consumers Drive) at the Westmorland Road intersection was recommended in the 1987 traffic impact analysis conducted for the 1988 mall expansion. Section 3 of the existing development agreement indicates that the developer is responsible for this work, but no completion date was included. To date, this work has not been completed. Staff recommend that the existing Section 39 Agreement be amended to require the completion of the right turn lane prior to the issuance of any building permits for the proposed expansion or to require an appropriate financial security and completion of the work by a set deadline. A condition of the 1988 Section 39 Agreement required curbing along the Westmorland Road entrance into the mall parking area in front of Sears, along the "collector lanes" within the parking areas, along the entrance from Consumers Drive., and along the outside edges of the parking lot to provide separation between the landscaped and paved areas. In 1993, the mall owners, Tritor Developments, applied to have the Section 39 Agreement amended to delete the requirements for cast -in -place concrete curbs in these areas. City Staff had originally requested cast in place concrete curbs, however information was provided by the owner of the mall regarding the potential for differential settlement and its long -term effect on cast -in -place curbing in the parking area. Information contained in the 1996 Planning Advisory Report indicated cast -in -place concrete curbing was no- longer recommended. 161 Anderson Architect Limited Page 8 515 -519 Westmorland Road (McAllister Place) January 14, 2011 In reviewing the site plan for the Development, there are areas where better delineation can be provided for traffic movements in the parking area. These include north -south movements in the area adjacent to Westmorland Road between the signalized entrance and Sobeys, north -south movements between the northern McAllister Drive Entrance and the internal intersection at the northeast corner of Zeller's, and within the parking area between Zellers and Sears. Staff recommend that a condition be added to the Section 39 Agreement requiring implementation of these improvements prior to issuance of a building permit beyond the first 2325 square metres (25,000 square feet) of the proposed expansion. Storm Water Management and Servicing The subject site is located south of the Marsh Creek Flood Risk Area, however, it is located within the drainage area of Majors Brook which flows into the Flood Risk Area, past Morland Trailer Park and under Rothesay Avenue and eventually into Marsh Creek east of Ashburn Lake Road. The applicant has been working with a consultant to explore the possibility of modifying or expanding the wetland on the property at the rear of the mall in order to reduce the flood risk to the rear access road, parking lots and mall entrance. A preliminary study and design and have been completed and the applicant's consultant has been working with NBDENV and City engineering staff regarding implementation of the design. It is the understanding of City Staff that the current design being explored is an expansion to or creation of a larger wetland area to achieve reduced flooding in the parking area during intense rainfall and storm events. Detailed engineering drawings showing how the expansion will be serviced and any required servicing changes must be submitted to the City for review and approval. A detailed site drainage plan and report is also required along with a review that the existing sanitary sewer and water supply systems in the area can support the proposed expansion. It is recommended that these conditions be added to the Section 39 Agreement. Building Design, Landscaping Building elevation drawings for the first component of the expansion have been provided and are attached to the report. The proposed expansion includes an increased emphasis on facade materials and the design of building entrances. In order to ensure that the final design of the expansion is of a high quality, it is recommended that Section 39 conditions incorporate the normal site development requirements imposed on such large - scale projects. This would include submission of detailed site and building elevation plans to the Development Officer for approval. Staff recommend that a condition be added to the Section 39 Agreement requiring these drawings. Since completion of the previous expansions to the shopping centre, the community's expectations have changed with respect to landscaping and building facades and elevations of retail developments. When compared with more recent shopping centre developments in the area, the exterior appearance and landscaping is clearly lacking and the proposed expansion provides the opportunity for the developer to address this. Landscaping improvements have been completed along the Westmorland Road frontage since 1989 that have included deciduous trees and planting beds at mall entrance intersections along Westmorland Road. Deciduous trees were also planted along the Consumers Drive frontage between Westmorland Road and 162 Anderson Architect Limited Page 9 515 -519 Westmorland Road (McAllister Place) January 14, 2011 the western Consumers Drive entrance. Staff recommend that the Section 39 Agreement be amended to include the provision that a landscaping plan be prepared showing plantings along the Westmorland Road frontage between the two existing entrances on Consumers Drive and that this plan be subject to the approval of the Development Officer. Staff also recommend a condition that the work shown on this landscaping plan be completed within one year of the issuance of the building permit for the first component of the proposed expansion. CONCLUSION: The applicant is proposing a major expansion to the region's largest shopping centre. McAllister Place is an appropriate location for further shopping centre development and the requested amendment to the Section 39 conditions to permit the increased total floor area is supported. An additional Section 39 condition is recommended regarding the timing of the right turn lane construction from the previous agreement. Section 39 conditions are also recommended regarding site servicing and drainage plans, parking lot circulation improvements, and detailed building elevation and landscaping plans. MR Project No. 10 -431 163 164 aUW Jy/ r�HHHHHfHIHUAHHII ,' ' 4 NNHHNHH�INNNHHHIIHM � �� • HHflIINHN3fHkHHHIHIM� �� �� � NNNfHHHNNHH�HHiµ� MWR O NNN"ffm mffmmmm �rrIIII ��ll milffi� omm"O � O 165 �W a� r� O a� O O i �i{HHfHNHHdI nHHHHH�IHNHHHHIIHI 4 HNHNiHHHHHHHIHlHHHl� i i EW I �HHHHH� 0 \�tt�iof �l�f oi. Q IRAN �u'�y . �HHHHHmHI HHHIHHHHHHHHHHHH" I �i HHHFHNiNINNIHfNHIHIHHHNM f HHHHHfHiHHHHNNHHfHHHIHI HHHHHIHHHHHIHHHHHHIHIMI HHNNflffHHHIHHHINlNIHIHlH HHIHHHHHHHHHH+HfHlIHN� HiHHHHHHHIHHHHHHfHHHH1 y HHNNlIHIHHIHHHfIHNHHHN� 3[�IiI��4 ��t dp me] .E a if i 1 i o° I 0 i } L III G .' zt° WU? j i1 r. m � . O_— yY y} i Lr— R H= -- l©' = L1— o- S I— . . f 167 3 r R; f 1 V—' rx n i} 3. f r y� a '+I7 9, 9 w 3 /0988 MAGroismar THIS AGREEMENT made in duplicate this I C-'- day of February, A.B., 1988. BY AND BETWEEN: •TRITOR DEVELOPMENTS LIMITED, a body corporate, having its head office Seglstry Office County of Saint 7ohit in the City of Toronto, in the This Instrument has been compared Willi Province of Ontario hereinafter called the "DEVELOPER" to the date, and the names of the parties .only With the purported orig! :l thereof which wad OF THE FIRST PART 84stered as numb. book/ .- and Rag9 onth day 0 1915 THE CITY OF SAINT* TORN, a body corporate, in the County of Saint John and Province of New Brunswick, hereinafter called the• "CITY* OF THE SECOND PART WHEREAS the Developer represents itself to be the owner in fee simple of land in the City of Saint John with frontages, on McAllister Drive, •Westmorland Road and Mark Drive, which land is hereinafter referred to as the "Lands" as shown outlined in red on the plan annexed hereto and forming a part hereof as Schedule "A "; and WHEREAS the Developer has submitted to the City a specific proposal for the development of the Lands, which development would expand the existing shopping centre known as McAllister Place -to create a Regional Shopping Facility; and WHEREAS the Developer in conjunction with the said specific proposal has applied to the City to have that portion of the Lands outlined in blue on the. said Schedule "A" rezoned from I -1 (Light Industrial) and.IR (Restricted Industrial) to SC ( 5hopping Centre) in order to permit the specific proposal; and WHEREAS the Developer has proposed in accordance with Section 101 of the Community Planning Act the establishment of conditions upon the specific proposal which conditions are contained herein; and WHEREAS the City by resolution of December 7, 1987 has expressed a preparedness. to acceed to the Developer's rezoning request, subject to the terms and conditions which the .City has imposed pursuant to Section 39. of the Community Planning Act and which are contained herein; 168 r ° 2 _ NOW THEREFORE THIS INDENTURE WITNESSETH . that in consideration of these presents. the rezoning applied for by the Developer and the terms, conditions and covenants contained herein, the parties hereto agree each with the other as follow: 1. The Specific .Proposal of the Developer includes an expansion of the McAllister Place Shopping Mall from its present floor area of approximately 211,000 square feet to a floor area of approximately 451,000 square feet. The expansion is composed of approximately: (1) A 131,000 square foot Sears Department Store; (2) A 28,000 square foot additional food store space; (3) An 80,000 square foot general retail addition; and (4) Parking for 2750ccars. „ Road Works 2. The City shall: (A) Design and construct at its own expense, additional traffic lanes and transit bus laybys on Westmorland Road between Mark Drive and McAllister Drive with separate left turn lanes as in the City's opinion are required.. (B) Design and construct an additional through lane having a maximum length of 200 feet on each of the northern, southern and eastern approach to the intersection of McAllister Drive and Westmorland Road, where in the City's opinion such additional lane is required. (C) Use its best -efforts to complete. the Road Works described in subparagraphs 2(A) and (B) hereof not later than July 1, 1989 or thirty (30) days prior to the opening of the expanded shopping centre, whichever date is la -ter. -- (D) Consult with the Developer's engineer during the course of the design of the Road Works described in subparagraphs 2(A) and (B) hereof, provided however, 169 f � ' - 3 - that should disagreement be revealed during such consulation that the City's position shall prevail. $. The Developer shall: (A) (i) Design and construct at its own expense a separate right hand turn lane on Mark Drive at the intersection with Westmorland Road. (ii) Design and construct the work described in Clause 3(A)(i) hereof in accordance with standards which- are'to be established solely in the discretion of the City's Chief Engineer. (B) {i) Deliver to the City a deed or deeds in registerable form conveying to the•City fee simple title "to any of the Developer's property which is required in connection with the execution of the Work described in subparagraphs 2(.A), (B) and 3(A) hereof. The Developer expressly acknowledges and agrees that the location and extent of such property will be determined solely by the City's Chief Engineer after consultation with the Developer's engineer. (ii) Deliver to the City the deed or deeds referred Co in Clause 3(5)(i) hereof within Fourteen (14) calendar days of the City's giving notice to the Developer of the filing in the Saint John Registry Office of the relevant subdivision plan or plans. (iii) Promptly sign any subdivision plan of its property prepared by the City in order to identify the Developer's land which in the City 'a opinion are required in conjunction with the execution of the Road Works described in paragraph 2 and subparagraph 3(A) hereof. (C) Reimburse the City 25% of the cost to the City of constructing the Road Work described in subparagraph 170 b - 4 - 2(8) hereof including the cost of acquiring, the land therefor, which amount shall not be less than $31,500.00. Such reimbursement shall be made by certified cheque delivered to the Commissioner of Finance not later than thirty (30) days following the City's advising the Developer in writing of the completion of the said Road work identified in this subparagraph. (D) Pay to the City interest upon 25% of the cost incurred by the City pursuant to subparagraph 2(B) hereof and which shall apply to the period of time between the City's actually incurring the aforesaid cost and the reimbursement by the Developer pursuant to the said subparagraph 3(C). Such interest shall be payable by certified cheque delivered to the City's Commissioner of Finance at the tine of•the'sa d• reimbursement. Sanitary Sewer System 4. The Developer shall: (A) Construct a replacement for the existing sewer treatment facility on Mark Drive, The replacement system shall consist of either a system of gravity sewers or a system of gravity sewers, pumping station and forcemains and in either case shall discharge into the Marsh Creek gravity trunk sewer at Rockwood Avenue. The replacement system shall be subject to the provisions of subparagraph 5 (C) hereof, capable of handling all flows able to be• handled by the existing sewerage treatment facility on Mark Drive together with all those anticipated from the proposed expansion of the shopping centre. The determination of flows anticipated from the proposed shopping centre expansion shall be made jointly by the City and the Developer's- engineering consultants. The construction of the replacement system shall occur in compliance with all applicable by -laws, statutory and regulatory provisions, including without, limiting the generality of the foregoing, the City's Flood Risk Area By -Law. (B) Undertake the design and construction of the system described in subparagraph (A) hereof entirely at its 171 - 5 - own expense except as provided for in subparagraph b(S) hereof. (C) Prepare and deliver to the City at no cost to the City: fi) a deed or deeds in regis,terable form conveying to the City an unencumbered easement or easement& in the form customarily used by the City for the purpose of installing, constructing, operating, maintaining, repairing, replacing or otherwise altering a sanitary sewer line crossing the lands of the Developer at a location mutually acceptable to the parties herein. a deed in eegiaterable form conveying to the City fee simple title in. the-land of the Developer upon which any" pumping• stati•on': il. constructed together_ with the surrounding area of a size and configuration satisfactory to the City's Chief Engineer for servicing the said pumping station as well as an unrestricted right of way from the aforesaid area to a public road. execute and deliver at its own expense to the City such other documents and assurances as the City deems appropriate to transfer to and confirm in the.City the ownership of the said replacement sanitary sewerage system. (iv) deliver to the City the deeds referred to in clauses 4(c)(i) and (ii) hereof within seven (7) calendar days of the City's giving notice to the Developer of the certification by the City's Director of Engineering that the replacement sewerage system is satisfactory as constructed. (v) deliver to the City the deeds or assurances referred to in clause 4(C)(iii) hereof within seven (7) calendar days of the City's. giving notice to the Developer of the need for such 172. - 6 - items. (D) Use its best efforts to complete the work described in subparagraph (A) hereof to the satisfaction of the City's Chief Engineer not later than July 1, 1989 or thirty (30) days prior to the opening of the expanded shopping centre, whichever date is later. In any event the Developer agrees to complete the replacement sanitary sewerage system not later than the 15th day of November, I989. S. The Developer expressly acknowledges and agrees that: (A) The design and construction of the said replacement sewerage system whether that described in subparagraph 4(A) or 5(C) hereof shall be. in accordance with the standards which are to be.- established solely in.the discretion of the City; (B) That the Developer shall neither commence nor permit the commencement of construction of the said replacement sewerage system without the City's Chief Engineer having first approved in writing the detailed design thereof; (C) That the Developer shall design and construct the replacement sewerage system to a capacity greater than that described in subparagraph 4(A) hereof if required to do so by the City, provided however -.that the City must give notice to the Developer of the City's requirement hereunder within 14 calendar days of the Developer's submitting a preliminary design of the said replacement system to the City's Chief Engineer; . (D) It must not interfere in any way with the continuing operation of the Mark Drive sewerage treatment facility without first receiving written permission to do so from the City's Chief Engineer. 6• The City shall: (A) Reimburse the Developer for the difference between the cost of designing and constructing a replacement sanitary sewerage system having capacity described in 173 subparagaph 4(A) hereof and one of greater capacity as referred to in subparagraph S(C) hereof. The said reimbursement shall be made by certified cheque delivered to the Developer not later than thirty (30) days following the later: (i) the certification in writing by the Cityis Director of Engineering of the acceptability Of the replacement system as constucted; the delivery to the City of a Registrar's Certificate. confirmng there are no outstanding Mechanics' Liens affecting the property; a Statutory Declaration to the effect that all expenses incurred by the Developer in designing and constructing the replacement sewerage system have been paid; (iv) Y clearance certificate by the Worker's Compensation Board. {8) Acquire at its own expense any easement which is necessary for the purpose of installing, constructing, operating,' maintaining, repairing, replacing or Otherwise altering the said replacement sanitary sewerage system. Pay to the Developer interest upon the amount described in subparagraph 6(A) hereof which shall be calculated at Prime Interest_ rate (as established by the Bank of Montreal from time to time) Plus 1% and which shall apply from the period of time between the Developer's actually incurring the aforesaid expense and the reimbursement by the City in subparagraph 6(A) hereof. Such interest shall be payable by certified cheque to the Developer at the time of reimbursement pursuant to subparagraph 6(A) hereof. Storm Water Storm e S stem 7 The Developer shall: 174 7 w subparagaph 4(A) hereof and one of greater capacity as referred to in subparagraph S(C) hereof. The said reimbursement shall be made by certified cheque delivered to the Developer not later than thirty (30) days following the later: (i) the certification in writing by the Cityis Director of Engineering of the acceptability Of the replacement system as constucted; the delivery to the City of a Registrar's Certificate. confirmng there are no outstanding Mechanics' Liens affecting the property; a Statutory Declaration to the effect that all expenses incurred by the Developer in designing and constructing the replacement sewerage system have been paid; (iv) Y clearance certificate by the Worker's Compensation Board. {8) Acquire at its own expense any easement which is necessary for the purpose of installing, constructing, operating,' maintaining, repairing, replacing or Otherwise altering the said replacement sanitary sewerage system. Pay to the Developer interest upon the amount described in subparagraph 6(A) hereof which shall be calculated at Prime Interest_ rate (as established by the Bank of Montreal from time to time) Plus 1% and which shall apply from the period of time between the Developer's actually incurring the aforesaid expense and the reimbursement by the City in subparagraph 6(A) hereof. Such interest shall be payable by certified cheque to the Developer at the time of reimbursement pursuant to subparagraph 6(A) hereof. Storm Water Storm e S stem 7 The Developer shall: 174 (A) Design, construct and maintain exclusively at its own expense a storm water storage system for the Lands approved by the City's.Chief Engineer.. (B) Devise a plan designating snow storage areas for the expanded shopping centre which is acceptable to the City and the Developer further expressly agrees to conform to such a plan. Water Supply 8. It is' expressly agreed and understood that all connections to the City water mains shall be supervised by appropriate City employees and shall occur at the sole expense of the Developer which shall at its own expense install the back .flow preventers determined necessary by the City. Site Plan and Building Permit - - - 9. The Developer expressly agrees and understands that notwithstanding any provision of' the City's Building Cy -Laws or any statutory, by -law or regulatory provision to the contrary, the Building Inspector shall not issue a building permit to the Developer for work directly connected with the expansion of the shopping centre structure, nor shall the Developer be entitled to such a permit unless and until: (A) The City's Director of Engineering has approved in writing the sanitary sewer replacement system referred to in paragraph 3 hereof;. (B) A site plan illustrating: (i) the location upon the Lands of the proposed building expansion and parking lot, layout is approved in writing by the City's Director of Planningi (ii) the curoing provisions within the area are outlined in red on the said Schedule W are approved in writing by the City's Director of Planning; 175 x- - 9 - the standard of construction of internal access road& within.the area outlined in red on the said Schedule "Am is approved in writing by the City's Chief Engineer; (iv) the location of the Loop Road' and its relationship to the shopping area as expanded and truck loading area is approved by the .City's Director of Planning; (v) the treatment of the transition area between the expanded shopping centre structure and paved areas is approved by the city Ia Director of Planning; (vi) the detailed landscaping plan for the area Outlined in red on said Schedule mAm is acceptable to the City's Director of Planning; and (vii) details of underground electrical servicing of the proposed shopping centre, expansion is approved by the City's Director of Planning. (C) A Performance. Bond -or security in another form acceptable to the City's Commissioner of Finance securing the due performance by the Developer of its Obligations under paragraphs 3, 4, and 7 hereof is delivered to the City. If acceptable security is Provided in a form other than a bond, it shall remain in full force and effect until the 31st day of December, 1989. OCCU anc 10. The Developer expressly agrees and understands that it shall not occupy nor shall it allow the occupation of the expanded shopping mall structure notwit statutory provision hstanding any bylaw or to the contrary, until the City's Chief Engineer has certified in writing that in his opinion the replacement sanitary sewerage system as constructed is acceptable and also that the storm water storage system as acceptable. constructed is 176 - 10 i 11• The Developer shall immediately Following third reading of the requested rezoning apply to the Lieutenant- Governor -in- Cou,ncil or other appropriate New Brunswick Provincial Authority for permission to expand the shopping centre as outlined herein. The City, if requested. by the Developers agrees to express to the Province its support of the Developer's application. Notice 12, Any notice or advice which' is to be given under this agreement shall be deemed to have been satisfactorily given to the Developer if delivered personally or by prepaid registered mail addressed to Mr. .Brian W, Mosher of the law firm Mosher Chedore, and to the City if delivered personally or by prepaid mail addressed to Mary L. Munford, Common Clerk of the City. In the event of notice by prepaid mail the notice will be deemed to have been received four (4) days following its posting. Reasonableness 13. Both parties agree to act reasonably in connection with any matter, action, decision, consent or approval required or contemplated under this agreement. This agreement shall enure to the benefit of and be binding upon the parties hereof their successors and assigns respectively, IN WITNESS wNEREOF the parties have duly executed these presents the day and year first above written. SIGNED SEALED AND DELIVERED in the presence of: } TRITOR DEVELOP ENTS LIMITED } } } Per: } ) } } And: } } ATHEITY F SA JOHN ommon erc } 177. i<rsiosfrumenl Purport, � �— 'I'.- a copy of the Fzemplaire pr6senl8 comma ^Crnal regratered ar copie conforme J 1- ins2rument 1, in the Saint Jdgn enregislre ou dr,au .ounty Re Office burePU d'enrNltk.;,' 9 y O'c NB tomle -,enf du de Saint John NB +mrtier- ncrmdro book -livre Paga J_ La 95 THIS AMENDING AGREEMENT made in duplicate this 29th day of June, 1995. BY AND BETWEEN: McALLISTER PLACE LIMITEA,,`a bod,y corporate, having its head office in the of # "$`��'in, the Province of Ontario, hereinafter called the "DEVELOPER" OF THE FIRST PART - and .. THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN, a body corporate, in the County of Saint John and Province of New Brunswick, hereinafter called the "CITY" OF THE SECOND PART W14ERF-AS Tritor Developments Limited and the City executed an Agreement dated February 18, 1988 pursuant to Section 39 of the Commurtity Llannin Act (Chapter C-12 R.S.N.B. 1973 and amendments thereto) respecting the rezoning and development of land having frontage on McAllister Drive, Mark Drive and Westmorland Road, now commonly referred to as McAllister Place; and WHEREAS the said Agreement was recorded in the Saint John County Registry Office on February 26, 1988 as Number 344433 in Book 1270 at pages 266 following and thereby botind subsequent owners of the Land in respect of which the Agreement was made; and WHEREAS Tritor Developments Limited by Deed dated March 2, 1990 and registered in the Saint John County Registry Office on March 5, 1990 in book 1405 at page 1 following as number 360581 conveyed to McAllister Place Limited, the "Developer heiein" entitled to the Land in respect of which the aforesaid Agreement was made; and WHEREAS the said Agreement contained a'specific proposal." for the development of the Land identified therein; and WHEREAS the Developet has requested that the City permit an amcndment to the said "specific proposal "_ so as to permit an increase in the floor area existing as of. the date of this Agreement by approximately 45,000 square feet- and WHEREAS the Common Council of the City by resolution passed at an open session of Council held on the 15th day of May, 1995 resolved to accede to the Developer's request and authorized the execution of an amendment to the aforesaid Agreement; NOW THEREFORE THIS AGREEMENT WITNESSETH that the parties hereto for and in consideration of the execution of these presents agree each with the other as follows: 178 9 1h •.2 1• Paragraph 1 in the Agreement between these parties dated February 18, 1988 is hereby deleted and replaced with the following: 1. The Specific Proposal of the Developer includes an 'expansion of the McAllister Place Shopping Mall.from its present (February 18, 1988) floor area of approximately 211,000 square feet to a maximum floor area of approximately 478,000 square feet, together with parking facilities for approximately 2,450 cars. 2• Except as expressly amended hereby the Agreement between the parties hereto dated February 18, 1988 remains unaltered. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have duly executed these presents the day and year first above written. SIGNED, SEALED AND DELIVERED in the presence of: MCALLISTER PLACE LIMITED Per � Segg And: _ THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN MAYO. AYOR t COMMON ERK Common Council Resolution Dated May 15, 1995. 179 i Uri oea 1 I V Z;J 1 30bb3de-'bJ (i n (n ) FIRST WESTMORLAND SHGPPPtNG CENTRES LIMITED loo Applewood Crescent, Suite 100, Vaughan, Ontario L4K 5X3 Telephone (905) 760- 6200 Fax (905) 760 -6201 -- SENT VIA E -MAIL & FACSIMILE January 17, 2011 Planning Advisory. Committee The City of Saint John Planning and Development P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, New Brunswick E2L 4L 1 RE.- January le, 2011 Planning Advisory Committee's Meeting Proposed Section 39 Amendment 515 -519 Westmorland Road (McAllister Place) Saint John, New Brunswick Dear Committee Members and to Whom It May Concern, As the owners of First Westmorland Shopping Centres, we are writing to express our concerns with respect to the Planning ,Advisory Committee meeting regarding the Proposed Section 39 Amendment of McAllister Place (515 -519 Westmorland Road) to allow for the construction of a proposed development expansion of approximately 5,900 square metres, being brought forward by Cadillac Fairview Corporation. We are unfortunately unable to attend the Committee meeting in person. We have reviewed the City's Community Planning & Planning and Development Department's Report to the Planning Advisory Committee (dated January 14, 2011), and make the following comments. We are concerned that there has not been sufficient time provided to review the staff report pertaining to this Section 39 amendment, nor was there adequate notification of this application to adjacent landowners. Though the letter was dated January 4, 2011 it was only received on January 13th, 2011 giving very little time to review the application. Upon our review of the January 14, 2011 report we also offer the following coy ments /concerns regarding the proposed Section'39 Amendment for the expansion of McAllister Place: • Page 5 of the Report states the applicant's development agreement currently Iimits the size of the mall to a maximum floor area of approximately 44,407.square metres (478,000 sq. ft.)_ The mall currently has a floor area of approximately 51,507 square metres (556,521 sq. ft.), which equates to a difference of 78,521 sq. ft. (or 7,295 square metres). There appears to be a significant discrepancy and confusion related to the floor area numbers and we believe a future explanation is warranted in this regard. :$ JAN 18 2011 3:41 PM FR FIRST PRO SHOPPING5 760 6201 TO 915066582837,575 P.03iO3 h � First Westmorland Shopping Cantres Letter to Planning Advisory Committee January 17, 2011 Municipal Plan Direction • Under the Municipal Plan Direction section, on Page 6 of the Report, it mentions that "the applicant has provided a market summary relating to the anticipated amount and timing of the uptake of the expansions areas ", and that Staff is "of the opinion this meets the intent of the Market Study requirement of the Municipal Plan ". • As also noted on page 6 of the Report, the policy of the Municipal Plan is "based on the need to maintain a consistent relationship between the various shopping centres in the region ". As owners of a nearby shopping centre in close proximity to McAllister Place, kindly advise how City Staff came to the "opinion that the market summary meets the intent of the Market Study requirement" of the Municipal Platt, as no justification (quantitative or qualitative) was provided in the report? Traffic and Site Circulation • On page 7 of the Report, the City acknowledges that "completion of a traffic impact study was a requirement of the 1996 expansion proposal [of the mall] Staff are of the opinion that the off - site traffic impacts generated by the expansion that is currently proposed will not result in significant impacts of the adjacent roadway network ". Please advise why the provision of a Traffic Impact Analysis was waived for the applicant? Storm Water Man ement and Servicing • Page 8 of the Report mentions that a "preliminary study and design [sic] have been completed and the applicant's consultant has been working with NBDENTV and City engineering staff regarding the implementation of the design. It is the understanding of City Staff that the current design being explored is an expansion to or creation of a larger wetland area to achieve reduced flooding in the parking area during intense rainfall and storm events. Although the provision. of a satisfactory S1%JM design and accompanying report is a condition of approval of the proposed expansion, why is the application being approved before the storm water management re- design is finalized? To conclude, we feel that we have not received adequate time to review the material, nor do we have answers to the questions above regarding the City staff report. As such we respectfully request that the Saint John Planning Advisory Committee defer the decision of the Section 39 amendment for NcAllister Place, to until such time that we have the opportunity to review the above requested and referenced rnateriais /reports. We trust that the enclosed is satisfactory for your use and look forward to receiving all further correspondence on this matter. Yours truly, ulolsde Land Development Associate Cc. Robert Blacklock Ornella Richichi 181 ** TOTAL PAGE.03 ** The city of saint john January 31, f His Worship Mayor Court And Councillors SUBJECT: Proposed Municipal Plan Amendment — Sandy Point Road A Public Presentation was made on December 20`h, 2010 of a proposed amendment to the Municipal Development Plan which would re- designate on Schedule 2 -A, the Future Land Use Plan, from Open Space to Low Density Residential, parcels of land with an area of approximately 6.5 hectares, located to the southeast of Sandy Point Road, between University Avenue and the Cherry Brook Zoo, also identified as being portions of PID Nos. 55059018, 55020770, 55059158, 00051383, 55196430, 55196380, 55059034, 55059026, 55059067 and a portion of Sandy Point Road and; Re- designate on Schedule 2 -A, the Future Land Use Plan, from Open Space to Medium Density Residential, a parcel of land with an area of approximately 3000 square metres, located at 999 Sandy Point Road, also identified as being PID No. 55176721, a portion of PID No. 55058952 and a portion of Sandy Point Road and; Re- designate on Schedule 2 -A, the Future Land Use Plan, from Low Density Residential to Open Space, a parcel of land with an area of approximately 13.2 hectares, located between Sandy Point Road and Samuel Davis Drive, also identified as being a portion of PID No. 00052548 to implement the land use recommendations of the Sandy Point Road Planning Study. The required advertising has been completed, and attached you will find a copy of the public notice and insertion order of the proposed municipal plan amendment as well as letters of opposition and a letter of support. If Council wishes, it may choose to refer the matter to the Planning Advisory Committee for a report and recommendation and authorize the necessary advertising with a Public Hearing to be held on Monday, March 14th, 2011 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber, or not to proceed with the proposed amendment process, and adopt a resolution to deny the application and receive the attached documentation for information. Respectfully submitted, Elizabeth Gormley Common Clerk ,Attachment SAINT JOHN P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, PJ3 Canada E2L 41.1 I www.saintiohn.ca I C.P. 1971 Saint John, N.-B. Canada E21. 41.1 --ter 182 City of Saint John INTERNAL INSERTION ORDER For City of Saint John use only: Bud et Number: 110 0801 442 2010 Department: Common Clerk's Office Account # 71206 Contact: Elizabeth Gormley Phone: 506 658 -2862 Fax: 506 6744214 Special Instructions (if any): Reference: Public Presentation — Sandy Point Road area Newspaper Insertion Dates (Check as applicable) (SJTJ= Saint John Telegraph Journal) SJTJ City Information Ad SJTJ Independent Placement SJTJ Classifieds Date(s): Tuesday, December 7, 2010 Date(s): Date(s): Information for Ad (Boldface anything you want Bold in Ad, Centre, Tab, etc.) Section Headline: ❑ General Notice ❑ Tender ❑ Proposal ® Public Notice Sub - Headline (if applicable)- Text: INSERT ATTACHED Call to Action: Elizabeth Gormley, Common Cierk/Greffiere communale Contact: Telephone: (506) 658 -2862 183 PROPOSED MUNICIPAL PLAN AMENDMENT RE: SANDY POINT ROAD AREA Public Notice is hereby given that the Common Council of The City of Saint John intends to consider an amendment to the Municipal Development Plan which would: 1. Redesignate on Schedule 2 -A of the Plan, from Open Space to Low Densiy, Residential, parcels of land with an area of approximately 6.5 hectares, located to the southeast of Sandy Point Road, between University Avenue and the Cherry Brook Zoo, also identified as portions of PID Nos. 55059018, 55020770, 55059158, 00051383, 55196430, 55196380, 55059034, 55059026, 55059067 and a portion of Sandy Point Road, as illustrated below; 2. Redesignate on Schedule 2 -A of the Plan, from Open Space to Medium DensitJ, Residential, a parcel of land with an area of approximately 3000 square metres, located at 999 Sandy Point Road, also identified as PID No. 55176721, a portion of PID No. 55058952 and a portion of Sandy Point Road, as illustrated below; 3. Redesignate on Schedule 2 -A of the Plan, from Low Density Residential to Open Space, a parcel of land with an area of approximately 13.2 hectares, located between Sandy Point Road and Samuel Davis Drive, also identified as a portion of PID No. 00052548, as illustrated below: [INSERT MAP] A public presentation of the proposed amendment will take place at a regular meeting of Common Council on Monday, December 20, 2010 in the Council Chamber, Lobby Level, City Hall. REASON FOR CHANGE: To implement the land use recommendations of the Sandy Point Road Planning Study. Written objections to the proposed amendment may be made to the Council, in care of the undersigned, by January 19, 2011. Enquiries may be made at the 184 PROJET DE MODIFICATION DU PLAN MUNICIPAL OBJET: REGION DU CHEMIN SANDY POINT Par les presentes, un avis public est donne par lequel le conseil communal de The City of Saint John a ]'intention d'etudier la modification du plan d'amdnagement municipal comme suit: 1. la reclassification, a ]'annexe 2 -A du plan des parcelles de terrain dune superficie d'environ 6,5 hectares, situees au sud -est du chemin Sandy Point, entre I'avenue University et le jardin zoologique Cherry Brook, et etant aussi des parties des NH) 55059018, 55020770, 55059158, 00051383, 55196430, 55196380, 55059034, 55059026, 55059067 et une partie du chemin Sandy Point, de zone des espaces verts a zone residentielle de faible densite, comme le montre la carte ci- dessous; 2. la reclassification, a Pannexe 2 -A du plan d'une parcelle de terrain d'une superficie d'environ 3 000 metres carres, situee au 999, chemin Sandy Point, et dtant aussi le NID 55176721, une partie du NID 55058952 et une partie du chemin Sandy Point, de zone des espaces verts a zone residentielle de densite moyenne, comme le montre to carte ci- dessous; 3. la reclassification, a ]'annexe 2 -A du plan d'une parcelle de terrain d'une superficie d'environ 13,2 hectares, situee entre le chemin Sandy Point et la promenade Samuel Davis, et 6tant aussi une partie du NID 00052548, de zone residentielle de faible densite a zone des espaces verts, comme le montre la carte ci- dessous : [INSERER LA CARTE] Une presentation publique du projet de modification aura lieu lors de la reunion ordinaire du conseil communal le lundi 20 decembre 2010 dans la salle du conseil, au niveau du hall d'entrde, a 1'h6tel de ville. RAISON DE LA MODIFICATION: Donner effet aux recommandations de I'Etude de developpement du chemin Sandy Point concernant ]'utilisation des terres Veuillez faire part au conseil par ecrit de vos objections au projet de modification au plus tard le 19 janvier 2011 a ]'attention du soussign6. Pour toute office of the Common Clerk or Planning and Development, City Hall, 15 Market Square, Saint John, N.B. between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, inclusive, holidays excepted. demande de renseignements, veuillez communiquer avec le bureau de la greffi6re communale ou le bureau de l'urbanisme et du d6veloppement a I'h6tel de ville au 15, Market Square, Saint John, N. -B., entre 8 h 30 et 16 h 30 du lundi au vendredi, sauf les jours feri6s. Elizabeth Gormley, Common Clerk Elizabeth Gormley, greffiere communale 658 -2862 658 -2862 185 From: Dwight [mailto:kerrad @nb.sympatico.ca] Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2011 5:52 PM To: External - CommonClerk Subject: Sandy Point Road Area development hello, the purpose of this communication is to show my support of full development of the sandy point Rd area as outlined by the city.. This would enhance the entire area as well as contribute to the tax base.. Thanks for allowing my input on the matter.. Sincerely Dwight Kerr 203 King St East S.J :. To whom it may concern, Rockwood Park is one of the greatest assets to the City of Saint John, both winter and summer. Saint John city dwellers and visitors to the city appreciate how lucky we are to have such a large natural park inside the city for all to enjoy. If there is any dispute as to which land needs to be defined, I should hope the Mayor and all the councillors are fighting for all the citizens of Saint John, to keep as much land as possible for Parkland. To keep the Parkland for all citizens to enjoy rather than a few who would be living in residential homes, apartments or town houses. This letter is from a citizen from Vancouver who moved to Saint John when her children were very young. At first we lived close by to Rockwood Park and the gardens, on Wright Street and were able to walk to the park. It was wonderful to have such natural beauty so close. We later moved to the center of town where the park was available by bus. Then later we moved to the West side but still Rockwood Park was available to us both summer and winter, specially now with the new facilities. Now I am taking my great grandchildren and visitors from back home to visit the Park. I brag about our park to equal Stanley Park that I grew up with and whose councillors were sufficiently far sighted to keep all of their parkland for all of their citizens to enjoy, now and in the future. I wish you luck in keeping our natural beauty as Parkland so all of the citizens of Saint John city and visitors can enjoy. 187 FEA J4 � &I January 19th, 2011 To: Mayor Court and Common Council Via Email: Common Clerk's Office January 19th, 2001 Stn Floor City Hall City Hall Saint John, New Brunswick Via: Email To: Mayor Court and Council, I am writing this letter regarding proposed residential building within Rockwood Park and adjacent lands.. I do not think it is prudent or necessary to sell property within or adjacent to Rockwood Park and I am not in agreement with ADI's and staff reports recommendations. , as an individual that lives on Sandy Point Road, there is no logical or economic advantage of following ADI's and staff's recommendations. They both suggest that the City requires medium and high density housing developments within what is existing park and adjacent lands that were purchased or donated to become part of the park (not a subdivision). There has been no formal market evaluation or cost/benefit studies to cooberate ADI's or staff's recommendation and, in fact, the current suggestions will likely lead to severe financial implications, not to mention destruction of an environmental treasure valued by citizens not only from Saint John itself but other communities and tourists, only. but single family housing, in this area, has minimal market value and certainly contraindicates using any of the lands of Rockwood Park and adjacent land (which the City would like to call "Surplus Lands ", despite we all know that the adjacent lands were purchased to expand the Park, not for subdivision development as I have learned from reliable sources and one from within the City of Saint John itself. As many have learned recently from extensive media coverage the provincial and federal governments, there will be less and less infastructure monies available, in the future. Many previous residents of Saint John have out moved to Rothesay and the surrounding communities. They have moved to those areas for several reasons but as costs continue to soar for transportation costs and costs of maintaining two vehicles in most familys, Some, if not all of this target population lives in single family homes and do not want to live in apartments or townhouses. , In addition, medium and high density development adjacent and around their potential homes would destroy the significant amenity of Rockwood Park and the golf course. Therefore ADI and staff reports would not help attract residents from Rothesay or other bedroom communities.. I would suggest that the process be slowed and planning /council should listen more intently to the citizens and other interested parties in this community. Additionally, based on what I have talked about in this letter there seems to be little demand for townhouses and apartment buildings in this neighborhood since Rocky Hills development has been a colosoal failure. A market analysis study and a costibenefit study should be undertaken before any more decisions are made regarding this neighborhood. Implementing ADI's and Staff's recommendations may lead to a very negative financial situation for the City and its taxpayers. Additionally, once residential development of the Park has been initiated the loss of the valued amenity of Rockwood Park would be permanently destroyed. This would be a significant loss to the citizen's of Saint John and the desirability of this neighborhood for legitimate, well thought out and well financed private development, once the significant Park amenity has been permanently destroyed. In any case, In my opinion the consultation process was biased from the beginning (and had nothing to do with the totality of the matter) and the results to date, on this project, has been expidited for, for unexplicable and illogical reasons.. I do feel destroying the amenity and natural beauty of Rockwood Park, for what may a insignificent interest in townhouses and apartments, would be a huge error. I trust that you and common council will give the serious consideration to my letter of opposition and many others that I anticpate that you will receive. During the month of October when I was in your office you stated to me in no uncertain terms that there was "No way" that apartments would be built at the Harrigan Lake site and then you proceeded to go over to the common clerks office and retrived two papers that stated this as well,. and furthermore you stated to myself and Dr. Darrell Gallant, who is a promising developer that "you dont know where you guys get these crazy ideas" You provided the copies of the papers to Dr. Gallant and myself at this time. There seems to be a lot of disinformation which you stated and I agree and a lack of consistencey and transparency on the City's part.. Also it is widely known that numerous citizens in the past years back in the 70's and 80;s had left lands for the exclusive use for the citizens of Saint John and Rockwood Park and not for anyother purpose... I am also opposed to this on another level as this current road from information that I have studied on its face does not fit within the Provincal Highway Traffic Standards act..it is flawed in many respects-such as line of site, distance-the number of parellel roads proposed-to mention a few of the standards that are found in this act. Also there is no mention from the City's perspective about the infastructure costs which will be in the millions of dollars incurred at taxpayers expense. Yours truly, Peter R. Stanton 1600 Sandy Point Road Saint John, New Brunswick E2K5E7 506- 977 -1258 Sandy Point Road (Millidgeville) Neighbourhood Group His Worship Mayor Ivan Court and Members of Common Council, City of Saint John, PO Box 1971, Saint John, NB E2L 40 January 18, 2011 Your Worship and Members of Common Council, RE: Proposed Municipal Plan Amendment and Rezoning for the Sandy Point Road Area SPRNG - The Sandy Point Road Neighbourhood Group - includes the residents who live or own property on and near the section of Sandy Point Road that stretches from University Avenue to Foster Thurston Drive. Approximately 40 households form SPRNG. The SPRNG neighbourhood objects to the proposed Municipal Plan and Zoning amendments for the Sandy Point Road area and requests that Common Council consider the following issues and recommendations and make adjustments before proceeding with this process. We would be pleased to meet with the City at any time to help achieve planned development that enhances the quality and serviceability of our neighbourhood, protects Rockwood Park, and addresses municipal development priorities. 1. Rockwood Park Boundaries a. SPRNG supports the Rockwood Park Advisory Board's recommendation that a "legal" boundary for Rockwood Park be established for the Study area and for all of Rockwood Park. A legal boundary is critical to ensure the City does not sell Rockwood Park lands without clear guidelines and a public process for decision - making. Without legal boundaries, economic interest will outweigh public good and further erosion of parklands will result. (The Sandy Point Road Planning Study did not acknowledge the City's intentions to sell parkland. Rather, it :: described the land being studied as "surplus city -land" that had received developer interest because Rockwood Park was not legally described). The establishment of a legal boundary should include guidelines for allowed uses of the Park and a transparent public process for adoption and change. Legal boundaries for Rockwood Park could be attained with the development of a municipal park by -law and /or through provincial govemment legislation such as that which protects the Horticultural Lands. SPRNG wants a clear process that engages the public in Rockwood Park's future and discourages unwanted erosion of land that has been dedicated for the public's use and enjoyment. b. SPRNG wants Council to follow through on its motion: RESOL VED that the City Solicitor obtain the resolutions of Council applicable to the City - acquired properties South of Sandy Point Road which were not part of the lands obtained for the Horticultural Association. (August 3, 20 10) And receive from staff (and make public) pertinent information that describes how and why the city acquired city -owned land that now makes up the traditional borders (along Sandy Point Road) of Rockwood Park. We believe this information is foundational to determining the legal boundaries of Rockwood Park. We do not understand why this information has not been provided. c. Rockwood Park boundaries should be legally established BEFORE proceeding with a Municipal Plan amendment process that could potentially and mistakenly include Rockwood Park lands in the revised municipal plan and zoning amendments and affect future land sales. 2. Proposed MPD and Zoning Amendments SPRNG recommends that zoning within this study area be maintained as either Park or R -1A. Our reasons are described below. a. Significant development and development pptential already exists in this neighbourhood. The City should not compete: A framework for modest development, in keeping with the current zoning and character of the neighbourhood, would eliminate potential competition with current developerslavai[able properties within the surrounding area. There are more than 1000 lots ready or planned for housing development in the area. Why is it necessary to include parkland? Lots in Fieldstone Estates are not selling quickly and the developer for the Rockwood Hills has put on hold their plan to build more townhouses because there is no market. If the City aims to sell Rockwood Park lots for high density development, it would definitely contribute to a further slump in sales of these current lots and discourage other planned developments in the area from proceeding. The Sandy Point Road Planning Study did not include a market study for this area and this is further cause for concern. The reality is current lots are not selling and there is plenty of planned development. What evidence points to the demand for and appropriateness of additional development in this study area? b. There are serious road safety issues: Given the road limitations (narrow with deep ditches, winding, hilly) and severe safety concerns for residents, cyclists, pedestrians and drivers who 2 use Sandy Point Road and Foster Thurston Drive, major development is a serious concern but this was not addressed in the staff report, except to acknowledge the need for traffic calming without explaining how this would be accomplished and at what cost. c. Mufti -unit development that borders parkland requires strict controls: While the staff report recommends more intensive multi -unit re- zoning for the study area, it did not support the development of design guidelines. Without the tools of design guidelines to guide quality development, SPRNG feels that a public re- zoning process is the sole public means available to properly assess individual development proposals for quality, safety and suitability. SPRNG recommends that multi -unit development proposals within the study area should be carefully assessed individually and therefore should be required to undergo a public re- zoning process. The staff report did not provide vital information to assess multi -unit development. It was so vague, we are not sure what would be developed on these proposed higher density sites. Helpful information would have been: -What exactly would be built on each site? -How high and how big? - Number of units for each - Locations of parking, driveways and roads - Building design and landscaping - Environmental impact - Traffic study d. The Sandy Point Road Planning Study was flawed: The Sandy Point Road Planning Study has failed this neighbourhood and Rockwood Park. It is neither a neighbourhood study nor a study of Rockwood Park. It also stands outside the Plan SJ process. What has resulted are proposed new boundaries for Rockwood Park that could easily change tomorrow and a patchwork of city -owned lands that are proposed to be zoned distinctly and differently from adjacent private properties and parklands, A good study should provide strong neighbourhood context and consultation. More than a year into this process, the City has not held a meeting with this neighbourhood (despite repeated requests). Individually and collectively, the residents of this neighbourhood have important knowledge, diverse skills and good ideas which they have spent countless hours sharing and analyzing, which have seemingly been ignored, belittled or marginalized by the City. The lack of value the City has afforded this neighbourhood (its people) has been nothing short of appalling. We urge you to bring community stakeholders together to help Council analyze the staff report, share insights and recommend agreed upon amendments to the report before proceeding with the more formal PAC process. e. This proposal requires an economic reality check and impact analysis before Council proceeds: SPRNG has grave concerns that the City has not analyzed the costs the municipality would incur to support this level of development: The roads are dangerous. We have no sidewalks. We are far from schools and stores. Critical road improvements to ensure traffic safety and the cost of changes to the golf course are not factored, nor are the park improvements, including the clean -up of Howe's Lake. Cost should be a significant 3 .M consideration and so too should the City consider what priority Council would give this Study area compared to other city priorities, including the priority development areas of Plan SJ. There are significant discrepancies between the recommendations of the Rockwood Park Advisory Board (RPAB) and the staff report: The RPAB recommends legal boundaries for Rockwood Park and design guidelines for developments, while the staff report does not concur. The RPAB recommends no development on Site M and no apartment buildings on Site L. These differences were not noted by Council and we wonder if the detail of the staff report was fully considered when you adopted the report. 3. Site by Site Recommendations: Site B (Howe's Lake and the former dumpsite) Current UIPD. Low Density Residential Current Zon Ing: RS- PfDpos : MPD. Open Space Proposed Rezoning. P SPRNG Recommandettun. This is a toxic dumpsite and should not be added to Rockwood Park until the site is cleaner ip and safe to use. Site F (former site of the Peacock's sign, by Sam Davis Drive intersection) Curzenl MFD: Love Density Residentlal Current Zoning: P Proposed MPD: Medium Density Residential Proposed Re=ning: RM -1 (3- -story Multlple Res.) SPRNG Recommendatlor�; Add this land to Rockwood Park, What can be ach1mved by rezoning ibis sliver of land to Rr - I? It would make mare sense to add Vi Is land to Rockwood Parr as the City is proposing a new Vate ay feature to the nearby parkland. Sites H, I, J, K While the City proposes housing development for these sites, the City has not studied how the golf course can be altered to relocate the 18th hole and the maintenance shed and the associated costs. These alterations may not be cost beneficial and thus impractical. The feasibility of developing some of this land for townhouses is questionable. Some of the sites are challenged because of rock outcrops, hills and gullies. SPRNG Recommendation: Maintain the current MPD and Zoning for each site until there is a suitable, doable plan for the revised golf course and multi -unit housing. Site H (Driving Range) Current MPD: Open Space Current Zoning: P Proposed MPD: Law Density Residential Proposed Rezoning: TH (Townhouse) SPRNG Recornmendatlort: Malntein current MPD and Zoning Site I (the 18th hole) Current VP0. Open Space Current Zoning: P Proposed MPD: Low Density Residential Proposed Rezoning: TH (Townhouse) SPRIG Recommendation'. Maintain current MPD and Zoning 4 191 Site J (the golf course maintenance shed) Current MPD. Low Density Res. / Open Space Current Zoning: R -1A/ P* Proposed MPD: Low Density Residential Proposed Rezoning: RM -1 (3 -story multiple Res.) SPRNG Recommendation- Maintain- currant MPD and Zoning Site K (along the 2nd hole of the golf course) Current MPD: Low Derisity hies. I Opel) Space Current Zoning: R -1A / P* Pmposed MPD: Low Density Residential Proposed Rezoning: RM -1 (3 -story Multiple Res.) SPRNIG Recommendation. Maintain current MPD and Zoning * Please note, for the backside of the sites J and K, there is a discrepancy in the current zoning between the Figure 4 of the staff report and the Map 4 of the Technical Background Report for the Sandy Point Road Planning Study. Mr. Nayan Gandhi has acknowledged that the information on the staff report is incorrect. Site L (1671 Sandy Point Road - close to the street, outside the proposed park boundary) Current MPD; Low Density Residential Current Zoning: R -1A Proposed .MPD: Low Density Resldenilaf Proposed Rezoning: RM -2 (High -rise Multiple) RP Ad.Wsary Board Recorrimenbatlon, No Apartment Buildings SPRNG Recommendation- Proposed park boundary -- supported. Maintain the current MPD (Low Derislty Residentia1) and Zon ing (H -1 A). The Rockwood Park Advisory Board recommends no apartment buildings for this site and the SPRNG supports its decision. We are concerned that the proposed zoning RM -2 would allow high -rise structures with too many development options and uncertainties. Why propose, vet again, once- reiected high - density apartment buildings? The Staff Report suggests 5 -story apartment buildings for this site. It is similar to the "Rockwood Condominiums" application submitted by North Star Holdings in January 2009. The North Star's application was withdrawn on recommendation by the Planning Department before it reached the PAC. If it was once determined not suitable for this location, why repeat again? A large structure on this site does not fit the neighbourhood /park context. Environmental Issues Large buildings in this site would pose a negative impact to the environment. • Further clear- cutting would likely be needed. • Pollutants such as salt, motor oil, soap and windshield washer fluid would run into Harrigan Lake through the storm drain. • Flooding is already reported by the homeowner adjacent to the clear -cut area. Melting snow and rainwater failing on the hard surfaces, not being able to be absorbed into the ground, could cause further problems. Site L (the backside of 1671 Sandy Point Road - inside the new park boundary) Currant NIPD. Low Density Res./ Open Space Current Zoning: R -1 A Proposed MPD: - Proposed Rezoning. P SPRNG welc cries the Qly's decision to return this land to the parks. 192 Site M (near the park entrance by the zoo) Current MPD: Dpen Space Current Zoning: P Proposed MPD: Low Density Residential Proposed Rezoning: SZ -28 (not yet defined) RP Advimy Bowd Recommendation- No housing developnent SPRNG Recornmeddatlon: Maintain the park boundary at the road and maintain current MPD (Open Space) and Zoning ('P)- The Rockwood Park Advisory Board recommends no development for this site and SPRNG supports this recommendation. Park boundaries at this site would be best left at the Road. This is a beautiful, mature, naturally wooded area with a well -used trailhead that could be enhanced. However, the Staff recommends the rezoning of this land to SZ -28 (a combination of multi -unit housing and commercial space) yet to be defined. This proposed SZ -28 zoning would be adjacent to parkland on one side, and properties zoned R -1A (2 single family homes on large lots), on the other. It does not make sense to plunk multi -unit housing and commercial space in the midst of park and R -IA zones. The current Park zoning would enable commercial development controlled by Rockwood Park (many examples of this already exist inside Rockwood Park). In closing, SPRNG supports quality planned development in this neighbourhood. The Sandy Point Road Planning Study has been useful in bringing to light the many factors that are required to achieve this but unfortunately has not yet produced a plan that will work for this neighbourhood or Saint John. We strongly encourage Council to recognize that more work is needed to ready an achievable plan for the next stage of approvals. We hope our recommendations will contribute to a better plan for ALL. Respectf subm' on behalf of SPRNG, Mon' Chaperlin 1711 Sandy Point Road 506.636.8073 Please note: The content of this letter was developed at a SPRNG meeting held Sunday January 9'h, 2:30 to 4 :30 pm, Cherry Brook Zoo meeting room. Contributors to the letter included: Sachiko Riegger, 1190 Sandy Point Road Doug McCaig, 1230 Sandy Point Road Darrell Gallant, 1580 Sandy Point Road Peter Stenton, 1600 Sandy Point Road Barbara Dodds, 1661 Sandy Point Road Peter Haslett, 69 Cranberry Hill Zahra Sharifian, 860 Foster Thurston Drive Jack Livingston, 132 Westmount Drive Monica Chapedin, 1711 Sandy Point Road Dick Powell, 1687 Sandy Point Road Wanda Cushing, 1434 Sandy Point Road Me Yong Jones, 1620 Sandy Point Road 193 M The letter was then circulated to the 35 households of the SPRNG network, who have email, for further refinement and ratification. Members were also urged to let us know if they did not want to be identified as a supporter of this letter. Only one household requested that their name not be included. The full list of SPRNG members is available upon request. 7 194 Chown, Jeanne From: Taylor, Jonathan on behalf of External - CommonClerk Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2011 11:23 AM To: Chown, Jeanne Subject: FW: Sandy Point Road Area From: Denise [ma!Ito:den!se60 @nbnet.nb.ca] Sent: Monday, January 17, 2011 10:22 PM To: External - CommonClerk Subject: Sandy Point Road Area Mayor, Council et al, I wish to express my opposition to the development under consideration on Sandy Point Road, effectively Rockwood Park. 1. The lands under consideration are park lands, either sold or gifted by prominent Saint John families expressly for enlarging the park. 2. This area along Sandy Point Road has been used for over 30 years as park land. Trails exist throughout that area for hiking, skiing, etc. 3. No "net loss" of parkland is a farce when citizens are offered, a toxic dump site in exchange for pristine park land and lakes. 4. Numerous developments in the area near SPR are stalled and are eyesores (e.g. Rocky Hills, Fieldstone Estates). Why is the city selling the park when land just adjacent is unable to be successfully developed? 5. Parks and trees have a positive effect in improving air quality which is important is a heavily industrialized city. 6. Urban parks provide access to wilderness and nature to people who don't have cars and cottages to escape the city. If you want to improve usage of the park, provide public transportation to it! 7. Development on the borders of the park, will likely negatively impact wildlife habitat, pollute soil, streams and lakes as any development will involve paving over natural areas and access by cars and all the resulting pollutants. 8. Sandy Point Road entrance to the park provides citizens with a tranquil and wilderness experience that people seek as an alternative to Lily Lake and Fisher Lakes. 9. Sandy Point Road itself, which is narrow, twists and has no sidewalks or bike lanes is not constructed for the heavier traffic that would result. 10. Instead of encroaching into the park and whittling away at it, the city should be promoting it as the largest or one of the largest parks in North America and maximizing it's size for a camping destination, eco- tourism, geo -park designation, etc 11. How objective & impartial is the Rockwood Park Advisory Committee when the Mayor sits on it as a chairperson. Were people hand - picked to be on that committee who would support the Mayor and his bias toward development? The tone of the Sandy Point Planning Study Report is very dismissive and I would say even somewhat belittling of the public input that had been submitted up to that point. Most citizens are not necessarily well versed in planning issues and zoning by -law amendments but they are passionate about the park and they know they don't want it to be sold off to developers. There is an agenda going on here and it isn't the citizen's of Saint John's agenda.. How many times, in how many ways and from how many people do you have to hear the phrase, "No development in the Park" before you actually begin to listen to what is being said. Denise Ainsworth 60 Candlewood Lane Saint John, N.B. 195 January 17, 2011 To: Common Clerk City of Saint John re: Response to Proposed rezoning/development in Rockwood Park on Sandy Point Road 1 am writing this to the Mayor, City councillors and the Planning Department to voice my opposition to the proposed rezoning and development in Rockwood Park on Sandy point Road. I am not a resident of Sandy Point Road nor a member of their residents group. I do live close to that area in Millidgeville. I use Rockwood Park and am very familiar with the area being discussed. I also have followed the issues through newspaper articles, websites and from watching council meetings. I have concerns because of several troubling issues which I will list here: 0 1 have a problem with the mayor being the chair of the Rockwood Park Advisory Board, reporting to council and then voting in council meetings • 1 object to the the suggestion that Howes lake(the former dump) area should be rezoned and added to the park as a fair exchange of land and therefore "no net loss ". It's toxic and unusable • 1 have a problem with Mayor Court and Councillor Bruce Court being closely related to a resident living next to the Golf course and therefore possibly being in a position to gain from rezoning and development. Its only right that both should abstain from a vote on any issues to do with this development • 1 have a problem with Brian White from ADI and the author of the Sandy Point Road study being married to Jackie Hamilton from the Planning Dept. and head of P1anSJ. How can either plan/study be seen as objective? • 1 see no need for more developments in the area when there are several now that are nothing much more than empty lots and for sale signs • 1 disagree with any development near water such as lakes, brooks and wetland areas • 1 object to the park being used as anything other than what it was intended for when the land was given to the city or purchased in the past by the city • I am offended by a process that seems to ignore public opinion and "plow ahead" The reasons listed above are just the few that stand out. There are so many reasons why this whole process is wrong and why I am upset. I know that there have been many letters to the newspaper and to council that object and are in opposition. I hope you plan to listen this time. Thank you. Cindy Kilpatrick 60 Candlewood Lane Millidgeville Saint John, NB E2K 1Z4 196 Atsko Nose 1687 Sandy Point Road Saint John, NB E2K 5E8 652 -9437 His Worship Mayor Ivan Court and the members of the Common Council City of Saint John PO Box 1971 Saint John, NB E2L 4L1 Jan 14, 2011 RE: Proposed Municipal Plan Amendment and Rezoning for the Sandy Point Road Area I object to the proposed Municipal Plan and Zoning amendments for the Sandy Point Road area. For the past 17 months, since the day the Sandy Point Road Planning Study was first conceived in August 2009, an enormous amount of resources and manpower were spent by the City and by the concerned citizens throughout the City of Saint John. To my dismay, the Study had turned out to be nothing short of a "show" that was put on by the City to justify its economic interest to sell the Rockwood Park land for potential commercial and housing developments. There are many issues that needed to be addressed and dealt with, with the ADI's Statement of Professional Opinion and with the Staff Report of Nov 18, 2010. But in the meeting of Nov 22, 2010, the Common Council adopted the Staff Report as is. Some important questions and concerns — such as the state of Howe's Lake dumpsite, the fact that the City could be hindering the private developers who already have invested in or have interest in developing the land outside the parkland, and how and why the past Councils acquired the parkland that now fronts Rockwood Park — were raised by some of the Council members, but they were interrupted by the Council members who supported the sale of the parkland. The recommendations made by the Planning Department, if carried through, would allow this neighbourhood to change for good with a rapid population growth without any feasibility study or impact analysis. Prior to the voting, none of the recommendations were read out. It was rather obvious and disappointing to see that some of the Council members appeared to be unaware of the magnitude of the decision they were about to make. The Staff Report suggests new boundaries for Rockwood Park along Sandy point Road, but it would be meaningless without a legal protection. As the City currently has no legal way to describe park boundaries, I would like the Council to create new park by -laws, ormove towards 197 provincial legislation protection like that of the Horticultural Trust Lands. If not, it is possible that the parkland becomes a subject of yet another debate over a new housing / commercial development. I would like to request that the City maintain the current MPD and zoning. But if any rezoning is to be considered, I would like to see a firm proposal on the table for each site. I am deeply concerned that once the sites are rezoned in advance, it is likely that any new proposal, as long as it fits within the new zoning, will be carried forward without a PAC process, or being put before the Common Council for any debate. While the Staff Report mentions importance on Design Excellence and the LEED Principles, it does not support the development of new design guidelines. I feel that the implementation of the design guidelines prior to allowing any rezoning would be the only way to achieve quality developments. I do not take comfort in covenants that niAyl& imposed through the Section 39. It is likely that it would become up to the individual developers to determine their own standards. I would like to add that I support the Rockwood Park Advisory Board's recommendations, in particular, to clearly and legally define the park boundaries, and not to allow apartment buildings on site L. I am concerned that the recommendations made by the Planning Department are so radical for this neighbourhood, while the details are so vague with no feasibility studies or impact analysis to back up the plan. A submission to the Common Council has been made by SPRNG — the Sandy Point Road Neighbourhood Group. The SPRNG letter speaks of our collective voice as the residents of the immediate neighbourhood. It goes in details into each issues and concerns. I would like to ask the Common Council to consider those issues and concerns when you make the next decision. Respectfully, Atsko Nose .; Chown, Jeanne From: Taylor, Jonathan on behalf of External - CommonClerk Sent: Monday, January 17, 2011 4:47 PM To: Chown, Jeanne Subject: FW: Sandy Point Road Area From: Alison Hughes [mailto:aehughes @unb.ca] Sent: Monday, January 17, 20114:34 PM To: External - CommonClerk Subject: Sandy Point Road Area To the Mayor, Council and Staff of the City of Saint John, I would like to raise some objections to the plans outlined on the City of Saint John website for Rockwood Park. First, the proposed plans to build apartments, townhouses and houses in what is now Park will harm the health and enjoyment of Saint John residents and visitors. Secondly, it will deter people considering moving to the City and waste taxpayer money. Rockwood Park is a much - needed refuge in an industrial city. Saint John residents and visitors walk, bike, swim, ski, run and walk dogs throughout Rockwood Park. Walking and bicycling to the Park has long been the way Saint John residents without cars can enjoy clean air and water. Entire families fish, pick berries, hike, swim and even camp in the Park and it needs to be big enough to accommodate these uses. As well, the trees in Rockwood Park help keep the air in the City safe to breathe by taking in carbon dioxide from industry and cars and turn it into oxygen. Rockwood Park is also a wildlife sanctuary with creatures that require an area large enough for food, shelter and reproduction, with range size varying by species. The more we hack away pieces of Rockwood Park, the less animals and birds will be able to survive there. As well, if deer are a problem in the city now, wait until the natural deer corridor from the Park to the Kennebecasis River is blocked by housing. The proposed development will also pollute even more lakes in the Park. Rain and snow flow off paved roads, driveways and asphalt roofs, carrying oily water downhill. This polluted water is known to planners as 'hard surface run -off and has already made Lily Lake smelly and unpleasant to swim in. Harrigan Lake and the others below the proposed development will also be polluted by hard surface run off, ruining them for fishing and swimming. The run -off will also flood adjacent roads (see water problems below the aborted development on Sandy Point Road) and wash out trails. As well, the proposal to incorporate the triangle of land where Highway 1 and Sandy Point Road meet into the Park is not a good idea because the lake there, which used to be part of the City Dump, is extremely polluted. I would be horrible if a pet, or worse yet a child, were to have contact with that toxic water while playing in the Park. The final problem is discouraging young professionals like those who currently mountain bike, ski and jog through the Park from moving to, or staying in, our City. It only takes half an hour to run, bike or ski the main trail from Lily Lake to the Zoo. Cutting into the Park sends the message that we don't want an active, healthy lifestyle in Saint John. Others problems with creating more roads into the Park include crime and garbage. Increasing car access will increase policing and City Works costs as paving creates more problems like those on the road around the Fisher Lakes where drivers currently cruise to pick up sexual partners. 199 It just doesn't make sense to use our tax money to finance development of housing in an area where plenty of empty apartments, 'estates' with unsold houses and serviced building lots already exist. The proposed plans for Rockwood Park will spend money that taxpayers don't have to make buildings that aren't needed while eroding a source of civic health and pride, Removing any part of Rockwood Park is bad for Saint John and Saint John should do everything possible to protect it and keep it whole. Thank you for considering the viewpoint of a long -time park user. Sincerely, Alison Hughes 529 -3207 aehughesa.unb.ca 200 Chown, Jeanne From: Taylor, Jonathan on behalf of External - CommonClerk Sent: Monday, January 17, 2011 1:32 PM To: Chown, Jeanne Subject: FW: Sandy Point Road Planning Study From: Janice Corbiere (mailto:janicec @rogers.com] Sent: Monday, January 17, 2011 12:55 PM To: External - CommonClerk Subject: Sandy Point Road Planning Study I usually read about the various projects put forward by the City and, whether agree or disagree, don't get involved. However, I feel so strongly about this proposed project that I can no longer sit by and simply grumble about what is going on. The whole concept of taking land away from Rockwood Park for the purpose of single and multi- family housing and who know what else leaves one to wonder about the compitence of those forwarding this idea. The are already several building options in the area including Cranberry Hill, the new subdivision across from Cherry Brook Zoo and Rockwood Hills. Are they overflowing with buyers? NO! Are there still a multitude of building lots in these three areas still available? YES! The thought of developers putting up apartment buildings in the area of Harrigan lake is absurd. Having been a landlord I know tlhat it is few and far between renters who actually care about the property they live in. Look around most apartment buildings and you'll find garbage of all types. Why would anyone want to distrurb such a beautiful area when there isn't any real demand for property in this area? My husband and I and several friends use Rockwood Park on an ongoing basis both in winter and summer. We use the trail beside Cherry Brook quite often. There are so many things that need to be done to improve this Park but building homes isn't one of them. How about updated maps? How about having broken picnic tables and benches replaced and others installed? How about making sure garbage that is left behind is cleaned up? How about installing more garbage containers throughout the main trails? How about providing a good skating surface for citizens other than just during the Pond Hockey tournament? How about providing a decent snack bar, properly run for those who do not want a full meal at Lily's Cafe? The list could go on and on but as far as I'm concerned it would never include taking park land along Sandy Point Road to build superfluous housing. Let's start building up the City Centre and providing decent housing alternatives in the uptown and South Central Peninsula for a beginning. There are many vacant lots in this area and others where the buildings should be demolished and replaced. In closing, I strongly oppose any change to the park boundaries and any additional construction in this area. What I ((and I believe the majority of citizens) would support is downsizing and relocating Peel Plaza and spending more money on roads which are a disgrace. Janice King Brentwood Tower 310 Woodward Ave., Condo 306 Saint John, NB E2K 21-1 (506) 642 -5327 201 From the Desk of Fran Oliver January 15, 2011 Re: Request for public written comment on a proposed amendment to the Saint John municipal plan to allow re- zoning of land alone Sandy Point Road Dear Mayor, Councilors, and Staff of City of Saint John; As a former resident of the City, currently weighing the pros and cons of a return, I have been following the current controversy 'surrounding the official boundaries of the City's Rockwood Park and the proposed re- zoning of land along Sandy Point Road' with interest. First, let me state that it is probable many believe that as a non - resident of the City l should not be eligible to comment. They have a point. But as a resident until 2006, 1 like many others before me, voted with my feet and moved away from Saint John. To prosper, Saint John must entice people, many perhaps like me, to come back - so possibly my views have some value. My understanding of the current issue is that there are some within City Hall and the business community who believe selling park land to developers is a sound, municipal, revenue - generating and growth initiative. On the other hand, there is contingent of Saint John residents who believe Rockwood Park is a gem worth fighting to preserve, and the maps depicting Rockwood Park boundaries, distributed by Saint John staff for the past decade, must be viewed as credible - past, present and future. In a city with an amalgamated population that has shrunk from a high of 100,000 in 1967 (slogan was 'Amalgamate or stagnate') to a low of approximately 65,000 today, it would be reasonable if the current priority of city politicians targeted 'retention' rather than 'alienation' of residents. It would be my opinion, that one of the major reasons for Saint John's declining population, and therefore its dire financial situation, is the weight politicians have assigned to the views of residents (low), as compared to those of business (high). This perceived weighting is misguided since each resident contributes almost exclusively to the well -being of Saint John, while businesses contribute to the prosperity of the Southwestern New Brunswick region. Page 1 of 3 202 From the Desk of Fran Oliver Businesses are relentless in their pursuit of profits and have the ability to hire talent to constantly promote their money making ideas to City staff and politicians. We know the lesson from marketing is if you hear something often enough, frequently you allow it to become your story. On the other hand, the majority of people in New Brunswick appear to invest in residential properties for the comfort and refuge their homes and neighborhoods provide. Residents work all day and are not interested in spending their evenings fighting city hall to protect their communities. When neighborhoods are under assault from business interests and municipal instability, people quietly move to a more favorable, peaceful location; and in New Brunswick, there is no shortage of municipalities competing for our home investment dollars. Unfortunately, Saint John has a history of city hall failures, which were originally promoted by the business community as good investments. A few examples follow: • 'Amalgamate or stagnate' from 1967. The results of that venture are clear and it appears the motto should have been 'amalgamate to stagnate' since Saint John's population has declined by 35 %. Note that the Moncton area did not amalgamate and all three, major, area municipalities have enjoyed population growth over this same time period. The City of Lancaster reborn, anyone? • Historic subsidy provided by residents to industry for water, resulting in underfunding of water infrastructure and therefore the current crisis related to providing high quality drinking water. • A regional landfill, constructed at the urging of the Saint John business community, and against the wishes of area residents, currently costs Saint John a minimum of 49% more in tipping fees than any other municipality in New Brunswick. The maximum difference between tipping fees in NB is 71% (Moncton at $63 versus Saint John at $108 per ton). Worth noting is that Saint John was given the option of shipping their trash to Moncton for the additional cost of transport, rather than constructing the Crane Mountain landfill, but business leaders of the day wanted the jobs associated with Crane Mountain. • $S million annual tax break given to the Irvings for construction of an LNG facility and based on faulty research and promotion by Saint John business leadership. All of the above examples have short- sightedness in common; in addition, the phrase 'short term gain for long term pain' is applicable. Do the current changes proposed for Rockwood Park qualify as a future candidate for the above list? I belief the answer is 'yes' when you consider that the City would be subscribing to the theory that 'upsetting existing residents is a means of attracting new, additional residents' —which is absolutely absurd! My recommendation for growing a vibrant, healthy City is to create a climate where existing residents talk about how great their neighborhoods and communities are. This positive atmosphere makes other people want to live in Saint John, too. And since businesses follow populations, the plus side of making the concerns of existing residents the City's top priority, is that it results in a healthy business sector. Page 2 of 3 203 From the Desk of Fran Oliver Consequently, serving the needs of existing residents must become the City's top priority and I believe those existing residents are opposed to the proposed rezoning on Sandy Point Road related to Rockwood Park. Therefore moving forward with the zoning changes, is in conflict with the goal of rebuilding a prosperous Saint John, In closing, one cannot help but see the parallels between the situation facing Saint John politicians over the proposed re- zoning and sale of Rockwood Park property, and the circumstances which contributed to the downfall of the former provincial government around the proposed sale of NB Power. I want to live in a community which believes residents have the final say in deciding which projects are acceptable for their neighborhoods. I will continue to monitor how this situation plays out and make my future home address choices accordingly. Respectfully, J. Frances Oliver �! j 2859 Route 860 Salt Springs, NB, Canada E5N 41-11 Page 3 of 3 204 Chown, Jeanne From: Taylor, Jonathan on behalf of External - CommonClerk Sent: Monday, January 17, 2011 9:32 AM To: Chown, Jeanne Subject: FW: Sandy Point Road Area From: Andrew Dunphy [mailto :adunphy @unb.ca] Sent: Monday, January 17, 2011 9:10 AM To: External - CommonClerk Subject: Sandy Point Road Area Mr. Mayor and City Councillors, I have recently moved to Saint John from British Columbia to take a job at the University. I was born in Fredericton and I have lived in BC for 13 years. I am an avid outdoor enthusiast and I am excited to see the potential of the area. I have started by cross - country skiing in Rockwood and I imagine I will Mountain Bike there in the summer. One of my colleagues has told me of your plan for development that cuts into the borders of the park. I think this is a travesty without exaggeration. In BC, if you tried to cut into a park, event slightly, you would have a revolt on your hands. The people of Saint John and NB deserve better. Once you change a park, you can never go back. As a new citizen, I plead you to re- consider such a move. Thanks, Andrew Andrew Dunphy adunphy @unb.ca 506 - 648 -5754 205 Chown, Jeanne From: Taylor, Jonathan on behalf of External - CommonClerk Sent: Monday, January 17, 2011 9:02 AM To: Chown, Jeanne Subject: FW: Sandy Point Road Area /Sandy Point Road Planning Study Would you add this to our file? From: pcblaney [mailto:pcblaney @rogers.com] Sent: Saturday, January 15, 20118:24 PM To: External - CommonClerk Subject: Sandy Point Road Area /Sandy Point Road Planning Study To Mayor Court and members of Common Council via Common Clerk 8th Floor City Hall Saint John Rockwood Park and adjacent lands are not for sale.l do not agree with recommendation from City staff and /or ADI's previous report.) do not want inappropriate high density development[townhouses /apartment buildings,etc.]In our park or adjacent properties of the park.Also I must ask what is SZ 28 why the secrecy.Of course I'm opposed how can I or anybody be anything but opposed.Without all the information it becomes impossible to make any sort of informed and intelligent decision.And if ones decisions are not informed and intelligent.Then they are wrong decisions. Somewhere there must be some plans for SZ 28 other than single family homes.Otherwise why would it need to be designated a Special Zone. I am also sending you my comments to Plan SJ. As I believe this study ,Plan SJ and your decisions are relevant to each other.I am sending this a mail to oppose ADI's and City staffs recommendations and as requested by council delivering this a mail to you before January l 9,2011 as indicated in the newspaper. Sincerely Phillip Blaney 403 Lancaster St. Saint John N.B. E2M 1 K3 Phone# 645 9558 - - - -- Original Message ----- From: pcblaney To: PlanSJ Sent: Monday, January 10, 2011 11:39 AM Subject: comments submission for Plan SJ Jan 10th deadline My criticism is not directed at Plan SJ and its citizen volunteers.But at the Mayor,certain councillors and the city bureaucracy who seek to undermine your efforts.And who seek to use you as a public relations distraction.Just like Vision 2015.And just like no net Ioss,LEEDs standards and purchasing land at a future date are exercises in greenwashing in the Sandy Point Rd.study. I believe that a growth strategy is important to shape the development of Saint John over the next 25 years.However this Mayor and Council are moving ahead with their own strategy.And they see no need for public consultation. Nor do they feel a need to worry themselves with economic or demographic realities.Nor scientific truths. The whole process in Saint John sadly is ass backwards.This is not the fault of Plan SJ,but of our local municipal government.The process should have been a study and report on the effects of Climate Change and Sea Level rise on Saint John.Then a municipal plan.Then if warranted a look at issues like Sandy Point Rd.Because right now we are being asked to help develop a municipal plan.And we don't have all the information needed to make that decision,nor does the Mayor or Council.Sadly they are fine with the situation,as politican they think it is more important that they be seen to be making decisions.I believe it is more important that we make the right decisions. If we had the info about climate change and sea level rise and future projections of the effects on Saint John.Then we could develop a real Municipal Plan for 206 Saint John.Then plan for mitigation and adaptation over the next 25 years.So that the next generation of Saint Johners will have everything prepared, and ready for them.So that they would be able to develop this city and to meet their and future generations needs.lnstead of merely trying to clean up our mess. Although Vision 2015 was and is merely a public relations distraction,it was passed by Mayor and Council and is still promoted.So surely it has merit,it must carry some weight and legal standing.lf you read it and I did send parts of it to you in earlier correspondence. Then it would seem obvious least it does as I read it.That this Mayor and Council along with city staff have Violated not just the spirit but the letter of Vision 2015.And on these grounds aione,l believe Plan Sj would be more than justified if they took Council to task and condemn them for undermining Plan SJ.You should denounce the cities plans for Sandy Point Rd. ie: Rockwood Park.1 will be putting fourth what I believe to be sound "legal " ?, morale, and psychological arguements for you to take such actions. Before I start on the legal examples, I would like to tell you the story of German Judge Ulf Panzer.January 12th 1987 Twenty German judges are arrested for blocking the road in front of the American Air Force base at Mutlangen,West Germany.Judge Ulf Panzer states" Fifty years ago during the time of Nazi facism,we judges and prosecutors allegedly did not know anything.By closing our eyes and ears,our hearts and minds,we became a docile instrument of suppression,and many judges committed cruel crimes under the cloak of the Iaw.We have been guilty of complicity.Today we are on the way to becoming guilty again,to being abused again.By our passivity ,but also by applying laws,we legitimize terror:nuclear terror.Today we do know.We know that it needs only the push of a button and all Germany, Europe, the whole world,will be a radiating desert without human life.lt is because we know this that we have to act.Many of us judges have organized 'Judges and Prosectors for Peace'.We have raised our voices in warning against nuclear death.We have worked with local peace groups,advertised against nuclear armaments,demonstrated and submitted resolutions to our parliament.Our warnings have died away unheard.That is the reason why we today block the U.S. air base in Mutlangen.We hope that such an action will be heard more loudly than all our words before." I tell this story in hope that it will give you the strength to do the right thing.That it may serve as a warning to you as to what is at stake not just for the city but yourselves personally. Quoting judge Panzer "By closing our eyes and ears,our hearts and minds,we become a docile instrument of suppression." " we have been guilty of complicity. "Right now you are honest honourable citizen serving your city.lf you allow the opportunity that you have to hold this municipal government accountable pass.Then I'm afraid you will merely become a docile instrument of suppression. Legal In 1984,in Guerin the Supreme Court of Canada reasserted a very old idea- the Honour of the Crown.The Crown is not a person,it is a concept.The crown is Iegitimacy.With the arrival of responsible government,the crown could no longer be presented as the legitimate will of any individual,even if ministers were doing the talking.lt could no longer be represented as an expression of power, legitimate or not.lnstead it gradually became an expression of legitimate authority built upon an abstract representation of the land,the place,the people and the obligation of those in authority to the Iand,place and people.So the honour of the crown is not simply the obligation to respect formal commitments.lt is the responsibility of the civilization to respect its reality.ln other words,the underlying idea of the crown has nothing to do with monarchy,any more than it does with contract and ownership.The Honour of the Crown exists whether or not there is a monarchy and it overrides both contract and ownership.At its core it is about responsibility. As a court case,Guerin was about a low level bit of misrepresentation by public officials to Aboriginals over some land in the Vancouver area that was to be sold off for a golf course.The civil servants were;if you like,doing things by the letter of the Iaw.They wre taking a pure contractual approach.ln its judgement,the Supreme Court reprimanded the Crown for trying to "hide behind the language of its own documents ".and condemned it for breaching its fiduciary duty.The court held the crown to standards that rose above written contract,far beyond the letter or evan the language of the law. "The issue was not one of contract,but rather conduct ". And just as the Supreme Court made it clear that its judgement was shaped by relationships predating the Royal Proclamation of 1763,so the primacy the court gave to conduct over contract has implications far beyond differences between the Crown and the First Nations.lt defines the general responsibility of the state to the Country and to the People.The maintenance of the Honour of the Crown is meant to prevent particular politicans of a particular day from using a panic or a fashion to override the broad public good. Delgamuukw in 1997 was the second judgement. Here, the Supreme Court gave oral evidence an equal weight to the written.There was no philosophical discussion about the broader implications of this decision for Canada,but the justices had in effect swept away the European concepts of progress.Why ?Because the idea of the written is intimately linked tothe idea of societies passing from an oral hunting society to a partly oral agrarian society to a dominantly written urban society. Suddenly Canada was representing itself- through that most written of things,a Supreme Court Judgement -as a non - linear society,one that could contain the reality of those three stages,not as stages but as stable elements in a complicated civilization within a great circle.The Justices explained that oral evidence could have the same weight as written or even greater.Why? Because it had been endlessly repeated in public and in that way constituted as a form of group memory- and therefore was capable both of exactitude and of expressing broader purpose. In saying so,they noted that oral history is not linear,not human centred.lt is "tangential to the ultimate purpose of the fact - finding process at trial - the determination of the historical truth " - because it sees history and truth in a very different context. These excerts are from John Ralston Sauls book A Fair Country. 207 I believe that in conversations that I and others have had with Plan SJ,we have shown many examples where this municipal government has violated the Honour of the Crown.And using the Delgamuukw case I would say it is obvious that we win the arguement on both fronts the oral and written.Our oral stance that Rockwood Park is Rockwood Park as we have always know it to be.ls backed up by the citys own written documents,advertizements,tourist promotions,tax records,maps in Rockwood Park,maps on line and maps to the general public and for tourists.Then there are council minutes from the 1970's and so on.And all this information has been repeated orally by local politicans and staff to the general public over the last 40 years. I believe that I and others have shown the importence of Rockwood Park socially, economically ,environmentally.How this issue is key to our local democracy and future. Now I shall delve breifly into the Moral and Psychological. Under moral we will start with this. In his "letter from Birmingham Jail" Martin Luther King Jr. addressed the "fellow clergymen "who had critized him for breaking the Law: I would agree with St. Augustine that "an unjust law is no law at all ". Now ,what is the difference between the two ?How does one determine whether a law is just or unjust ?A just law is a man -made code that squares with the moral law or the law of GOD.An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral Iaw.To put it interms od St. Thomas Aquinas: An unjust law is a human law that is not rooted in eternal law and natural Iaw.Any law that uplifts human personality is just.Any law that degrades human personality is unjust. From Thomas Cahill Mysteries of the Middle Ages I would also refer you to Dante's nine circles of Hell. Now for psychological.) would turn to Philip Zimbardo author of The Lucifer Effect. Understanding how good people turn evil Mr. Zimbardo is the creator of the landmark Stanford Prison Experiment. He defines evil from a psychologially based defination" Evil consists in intentionally behaving in ways that harm,abuse,demean,dehumanize,or destroy innocent others -or using one's authority and systemic power to encourage or permit others to do so on your behalf. "Or as Mr. Zimbardos friend and mentor Irving Sarnoff says" Evil is knowing better but doing worse." I have already sent you earlier a segment from John Ralston Saul's book. A fair Country. Regarding the state of poverty and the systemic failure of government in dealing with this issue.No need to send it again I would just refer you to it.As I feel it represents fairly the systemic failure of all levels of government on a wide awray of issues.And demonstrates an intent which can be described as evil.The problem with systemic failure is that people inside, and out side the system resign themselves to what they believe to be facts.That there is nothing one can do.So those inside merely dot is and cross is shuffle paperwork and wait for retirement.Those on the outside complain but they don't vote or participate because they believe it all to be point Iess.To overcome this systemic failure I would refer one to Matthew 19:26. Again I praise the people at Plan SJ.But I am of the opinion,that the city had no intention for Plan SJ to succeed.lt like other measures are at best an afterthought.But more likely at their worst cold calculated PR exercises.lf they truly wanted Plan Sj to succeed,then they would have started from vision 2015.They would have gotten all the citizens involved with 2015,to start immediately engaging citizens, knocking on doors.Gathering info and sharing info.Plan SJ would of had 3 -4 years.) think Plan SJ needs to condemn the Mayor and Council and staff for their what I can only describe as deceit ,misrepresentation and obstructionist tactics. Fu the rmore I believe Plan SJ should recommend.That we start again.A new new municipal plan.Halt Sandy Point Rd plans.Start again with a Transition Town Program.Which have meet with various levels of success throughout the world.The city can help fund the initiative but not be involved it needs to be citizen lead. I would now like to direct you to some articles that have been in the local paper.lt is my belief that if Rockwood Park is left alone, or with a minimal of investment and proper pianning.We could help to address the problems reported in the TJ. Decl Oth. "We've Got To Pay Attention" A troubling new survey shows 30% of young NBers report having poor mental health. The survey indicates that roughly 23,000 youth aged 12- 18 have experienced difficulty with mental health issues ranking NB 11 out of 15 nationally. The NB Health Council survey draws attention to a number of other disturbing indicators relating to youth health. Only one quarter of young NBers eat the daily requirement of fruit and vegetables 3 out of 5 youth are not eating breakfast daily 3 out of 5 are not active enough physically and only half get at least 8 hours of sleep each night. Some suggest that in reality things are probably worse than this report suggest. TJ Dec 14th " Helping Put The Run To Obesity" N.B was the last place finisher in a report card on physical activity levels among Canadian youth. Then there is the issue of Accountability and Transparency as reported in the TJ Dec 14th." Saint John rated least transparent in CANADA ". This article was regarding fiscal transparency. But in all honesty Saint John's municipal gov't is lacking in transparency in all aspects of its existence.Look at the 16% voter turnout re: Ward 3 by election. Saint John is celebrating its 225 birthday.Let's look at how other communities celebrate such miiestones.TJ Decl4th. "Anniversary Park Was A Long Time In The Making" 208 Rothesay provides a lasting legacy for her citizens in celebration of her 150th anniversary.With the creation of an Anniversary Park. "It's the start of a park" Bill Artiss chairman of the Anniversary committee for Rothesay 150." The intent is to possibily acquire more land and develop it into something more like a nature reserve to attract more waterfowl and wildlife." Artiss said it's important to protect natural spaces within municipalities.lt is such things like parks,walking trails,golf and yacht clubs and other recreational facilities that lure people into communities. The value the worth of Rockwood Park. Environmentally, Socially, Physical and Mental Health and Well being, Economically as of today, far out weighs any short term benefit if any that Saint John would receive by having the Mayor selling off Rockwood Park peice meal or whole sale.And if we look to the future and the hardships that rising sea levels and ciimate change will present to Saint John.Then it becomes even more obvious how truly important Rockwood Park is to the future of Saint John.Rockwood Park has been an integral part of our history, and it has a key role to play if we are to have a meaningful future. will end with several links. I believe everybody should look at if they truly wish to understand the issue of Rockwood Park.And if they want to see Saint John become a viabrant and sustainable community.As well as a quote from Bernard Lord.Who at the Economic Summit in Moncton referring to NB debt and deficit said" We can not put this burden on future generations." He called it "Intergenerational thieft ".And that is what this Mayor ,council and staff along with their supporters will be doing.lf they go ahead and sell even an inch of Rockwood Park. Please read the Sandy Point Road Study and the links listed below.And then make an informed and educated decision, The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity http: / /wvvw.teebweb. orq/ ForLocal andRegionalPolicy/ LocalandRegionalPolicyMakersChapterDraft /tabid /29433 /Default.asp X Watershed Management Plan Alder Brook http : / /www.acaps*.comfyVatersheds files /alderbrookmanagementplan.pdf Maine's Climate Future An Initial Assessment http: / /climatechange.umaine.edu /files / Maines Climate Future.pdf BBC News Green spaces reduce health gap htto: // news, bbc .co.uk /2 /hi /health /7714950.stm Evangelical Climate Initiative Call to Action http: / /christiansandcli mate, org /l earn/cal l -to- action/ Sincerely Phillip Blaney 403 Lancaster St. Saint John N,B. E2M 1K3 Ph# 645 9558 209 Chown, Jeanne From: Taylor, Jonathan on behalf of External - CommonClerk Sent: Monday, January 10, 2011 4:39 PM To: Chown, Jeanne Subject: FW: Sandy Point Road Planning Study From: Marie - Helene Morell [mailto:marie.eneleh @gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 26, 2010 2:35 PM To: External - CommonClerk Subject: Sandy Point Road Planning Study Addressed to those making the decisions concerning the development of Rockwood Park, As a long -time citizen of Saint John, it greatly saddens me to hear that a beautiful part of Rockwood Park may be sacrificed to the designs of development, while acquiring a contaminated and dirty piece of land as payment. This exchange seems to me to be in no way equitable, on the contrary appears to be weighted in the favour of those doing the developing, and at the expense of those who enjoy Rockwood park. I would like to voice my opposition to this project and hope that a more desirable solution could be found that would benefit all parties involved, and most of all preserve all aspects of this pristine park all Saint Johners know and love. Thank you for your consideration, Marie Morell 210 Chown, Jeanne From: Taylor, Jonathan on behalf of External - CommonClerk Sent: Monday, January 10, 2011 4:39 PM To: Chown, Jeanne Subject: FW: Sandy Point Road Area From: fay and andy [ mailto:faynandy @bellaliant.net] Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 20119:51 AM To: External - CommonClerk Subject: Sandy Point Road Area This is coming to you from Digby N.S. 1 cannot understand how destroying such a vital asset, as Rockwood Park is being accepted H Many communities of the Saint John area, as well as tourism hold this in such high regard. Rockwood Park is a mainstay for so many people as well as nature and wildlife. To destroy this, for a concrete jungle is ludicrous 1! 211 His Worship Mayor Ivan Court and Council Jan 18, 2011 City of Saint John 8th Floor City Hall Saint John NB Via Common clerk Subject: Sandy Point Road Planning Study Dear Mayor and Council: I wish to express my opposition to any removal of Rockwood Parklands or adjacent lands presently considered to be part of the park for those purposes as recommended in the ADI report on this matter and further any recommendations with respect to rezoning park lands so they may be used for high density development etc. There is clear evidence that the lands in question were provided to the city or purchased by the city to be used as park.. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Please save Rockwood Park for now and future generations Sincerely Colin Seeley 37 Old Black River Road Black River NB E2S 1Z4 Tel #506 - 696 -8240 colinseeley@gmail.com 212 January 14, 2011 5 Peters Lane Rothesay, NB Marx miu Council PO Box 1971 Saint John, NB Rockwood Park Rezoning Dear Sirs: I object to the proposed rezoning of Sandy Point Road. It is my understanding that Rockwood Park is a regional park and I enjoy bird watching and hiking in this unique area. The introduction of High Density Housing to this area would be a travesty. I urge you to reconsider this proposal. Yours truly Susan M. Petrie 5 Peters Lane Rothesay, NB E2E 5T2 213 Mayor and Members of Common Council, January 14, 2011 City of Saint John, New Brunswick. Dear Mayor and Council, I have enjoyed a variety of activities in Rockwood Park for many years, and I have an appreciation of the uniqueness and value this park offers to a wide variety of park visitors. I work at the university, and have enjoyed skiing, mountain biking, orienteering, running and exploring in this park. While the Lily Lake region offers features and facilities of a more urban park, the more distant areas towards Cherry Brook Zoo are a secluded wilderness setting more comparable to Fundy National Park. This is quite a unique feature for a park bordering on a city, but the characteristics will be lost if development is allowed along the perimeter. Past reports on the park have talked about the view of the park from the outside, and the access points, but the focus should be on the experience inside the park. For the many people like myself who enjoy the wilderness regions of Rockwood Park, it is the natural views, natural forest and lakes, and relative quiet that are key components. Development on the perimeter, particularly on the high ground towards the zoo would remove all of this. In clearing trees for buildings and a view into the park, it would ruin the natural views from within, lead to much added noise, and inevitable run -off pollution to the water table below. It has been mentioned that other parks typically have a transition region at the perimeter, but that only makes sense when a park is surrounded by urban development. It is absurd to have a relatively dense single or multi -story residential strip on the border of a park when there are only woods or sparse single family residences outside the park. Most Rockwood Park visitors do not live in the immediate vicinity of the park, and entrances which pass close to dwellings are not going to be comfortable for either the visitors or the residents, who will no doubt develop a feeling that the park is more "theirs ". I would suggest viewing the undeveloped regions of Rockwood Park as a valuable asset just the way they are. I hope council will decide not to sell off or rezone land bordering on roads as this would be an irreversible loss which would greatly diminish the future potential of the Park. Sincerely, Peregrine Qy 214 SAINTJOHN FUNDY CHAPTER CONSERVATION COUNCIL OF NEW BRUNSWICK To Mayor and Council c/o Elizabeth Gormley, Common Clerk City of Saint John 15 Market Square, PO Box 1971 Saint John NB E21L 41-1 1216 Sand Cove Road, Box 1 Saint John NB E2M 5V8 January 12, 2011 SUBMISSION OF OBJECTION TO PROPOSED MUNICIPAL PLAN AMENDMENT In response to the public notice regarding the proposed Municipal Plan amendment to redesignate city -owned properties along Sandy Point Road, the Saint John Fundy Chapter, Conservation Council of New Brunswick objects to the redesignation of these parcels of land identified in items #1 and #2 in the public notice. These properties are part of Rockwood Park and have been part of Rockwood Park after being acquired by the city for park purposes and incorporated into Rockwood Park four decades ago. • For over 35 years these lands have been used and enjoyed by hikers, naturalists and the general public as park land. • These properties have been identified and assessed as park land by the provincial government for taxation purposes. • The provincial GIS Property Identification System identifies these properties as park land. • Also, maps of Rockwood Park published by the city over the years clearly show these properties to be in, and part of Rockwood Park. There is clearly no need in this area of the city for land or building lots to accommodate any foreseeable community demand for residential buildings either single family or multi- family units. In fact there are two residential subdivisions (Fieldstone Estates and Cranberry Hill) with dozens of unsold building lots and a third subdivision being planned by Dr. Gallant in the immediate area. These are on uplands just across from Rockwood Park on the west and north sides of the Sandy Point Road. Off University Avenue just across from the park and east of the Blood Services building a new housing development (Rockwood Hills) with space for several large multi -unit buildings and other residential housing structures is currently being developed with the first two multi -unit buildings now completed. Other land now available for residential construction in the Millidgeville and North End areas of the city includes: the large area of vacant land in Crescent Valley approved for multi -unit buildings capable of accommodating hundreds of units single family building lots in the subdivision near the Millidgeville ferry landing dozens of single - family building lots in the Anchorage Subdivision in Millidgeville 215 In addition there are many other currently vacant property areas in North End Saint John which are residential and which could easily be built or rebuilt on, as is also the case in many other parts of the city. If the properties in items number one and two of the public notice for proposed Municipal Plan amendment are redesignated and developed, significant buffering for Rockwood Park will be lost; particularly as the properties are located on elevated areas above the park and adjacent to very busy roadways. If the properties host future residential development the park areas will be at risk from parking lot runoff, general runoff and runoff from lawn chemicals and pesticides whenever they may be used in the future. As well due to the elevation of the properties, when tree and vegetation removal are carried out it will open up long windscapes which will lead to a blow down of large, old - growth trees farther back in the park which are rooted in very thin soil atop rock outcroppings. Habitat buffering for both plants and animals will be removed and additional noise and night lighting will find its way into the park. The Sandy Point Road which supports heavy traffic flows from the university, the hospital and the community is narrow and twisty with hills, blind spots and no sidewalks. The addition of more residential housing and driveway access onto the Sandy Point Road would only serve to make a bad situation worse. Furthermore, to widen the Sandy Point Road, put in sidewalks, put in new drainage directed away from the park and put in additional lighting would cost the city a large amount of money. In the past few months over 3,000 people have signed petitions requesting that no Rockwood Park lands or city owned properties bordering Rockwood Park be sold for development purposes. This petition is certainly the largest taken regarding any municipal planning issue in Saint John in recent years and perhaps ever. People in this city care about Rockwood Park and want to see the natural areas, green spaces, habitats and buffering lands in the park preserved. We are very fortunate to have a large park with the biological and natural diversity of Rockwood Park within the city. Rockwood Park adds greatly to the well being and quality of life in Saint John. For most cities having such a park or the opportunity to set aside lands for such a park can only be a dream. Lands within Rockwood Park should not be redesignated or rezoned for development now or at an time in the future. Rockwood Park must not be nickeled and dimed away for the benefit of property developers or as a source of revenue for the city. Respectfully submitted, David H. Thompson, Director for Saint John Fundy Chapter Conservation Council of New Brunswick 216 January 14, 2011 Mayor Court and Councillors Saint John City Hall, Market Square, Saint John, NB I register my opposition to any residential development in what I consider to be Rockwood Park Some of my concerns are: L)The high - handed manner in which the Rockwood Park boundaries have been re- configured. Amongst the proposed changes is the definition of Rockwood Park boundaries. Planning staff and some councilors have said that they have defined the boundaries of the park. What they have in fact done is re- designed the boundaries -not legally but someone has drawn a dotted line where planning staff think the boundaries should be. The public has been told that these boundaries will be set and there WILL BE NO DISCUSSON on them. They are set. The ADI study acknowledged the boundaries *r.as bordering Sandy Point Road.: Mr. Gandhi in his report to council said," Staff does not question that Council's original intent was to make these lands part of the park, and a number of plans were drawn up to this effect'' The general public believes the boundaries of Rockwood Park to be along Sandy Point Road, Foster Thurston, the throughway and the area around Lily Lake. What is proposed in the staff report is that the boundaries of Rockwood Park have been defined as 150 meters into the Park from Sandy Point Road. City staff has just drawn a line on a map to show the boundaries, lots have not been surveyed or legally determined. 2) Former Howe's Lake Landfill. This is a toxic site. Former city manager Terry Totten told council that it is so toxic that it is unhealthy for dogs and people to walk in the area. Mr. Groody told council, it will take years and a great deal of money to remediate the site.One wonders how a park planner could possibly suggest trading off pristine parkland for this toxic site so as to have no net loss of parkland. The proposed zoning change is from RS- 2 one and two family residential to P for Park. 3.) Proposed residential site at the corner of Samuel Davis Drive and Sandy Point Road excluded from the Park south of Crescent Lake. This is proposed re -zoned from Park to RM -1 three storey Multiple residential. 217 4.) Proposed changes to the golf course It is planned to relocate the current Golf Course Hole 18 establish a site for residential development with the rezoning change from Park to Townhouse. It permits townhouses, semi and single family uses. Proposed to re- locate the existing maintenance shed to establish a site for residential development. Re- zoning proposed three storey residential. Permits small scale multi -unit buildings, stacked or ground level townhouses, semi and single detached dwellings. I have been told that one change to a hole could be a million dollars. Has the city staff even investigated the cost of these two suggestions? 5.) Existing trailhead next to Cherry Brook Zoo. Rezoning proposed is a Special zone called SZ -28. Permits limited scale recreation -based commercial, along with multi -unit residential and park uses. This zone is not found in the current municipal plan and staff has indicated that it will not be defined until after January 19 when the community cannot comment. 6.) Harrigan Lake site #1671 Sandy Point Road Proposed rezoning for this site is RM -High density which allows for up to 15 storeys. This is really inappropriate for this area. The issues surrounding the properties are varied and complex but the most serious of these are the six mentioned. If any of the proposed changes to the municipal plan and the changes to re- zoning are passed by Common Council there will be no further opportunities for the public to comment because it will be a done deal for ever. It is my understanding that last year there were changes to the Community Planning Act which empowered any person in the planning department, planners, real estate staff, technicians to approve developments as they see fit. It used to be that there would be public hearings if the public had concerns. As late as Sunday January 2, 2010 Mayor Court was on Saint John Radio stating that there would be NO apartment buildings along Sandy Point Road, that there are only single family residences planned BUT there are at least 5 sites that are being proposed re -zoned from single family to 2 -3 storey medium density and high density, which allows for 15 storeys. He is definitely misleading the public. Respectfully submitted, /:-� C_.' Joan Pearce 3 52 Pelton Road, Saint John, NB E2K 5H7 218 TO: Mayor and Council City of Saint John 15 Market Square PO Box 1971 Saint John, New Brunswick E21, 4L1 I lived in Saint John, New Brunswick for several years before finishing my Bachelor of Science in Electrical Engineering in Fredericton and will no doubt return to reside in Saint John within the next year. Even when I was living in Fredericton, I visited Rockwood Park for mountain biking, hiking, climbing, community cheer, skiing, orienteering and/or swimming on a regular basis and now visit five times a week while residing in Quispamsis. Regardless of residence, like so many other regional park goers, my paycheque contributes to federal and provincial taxes, and is largely spent at Saint John businesses. Being one of North America's oldest and largest city parks, Rockwood Park is an attraction for tourists as well as an important recreational area for Saint John and region residents. It is one of Saint John's greatest assets, and should be preserved in its entirety as a unique centrepiece for the City in the future. I do not want to see the City of Saint John'sell out' Rockwood Park for the development of property. This construction will be an obvious mistake for the city of Saint John and will no doubt bring grave regret in the future. It will only be a temporary solution to monetary shortfalls; a `supposed' substantial amount of money, with long term regret from diminishing what this unique park is. Retaining the full size of the park can only be beneficial for the future. Building on park land, for the purpose of living next to the park, is very ironic. Rockwood Park offers a great range of recreational opportunities for all ages and interests in a park that transitions from an urban park with numerous facilities to a secluded wilderness habitat. It is a sanctuary for animals, important plants as well as people, and is an important ecosystem in the region. Viewscapes from interior parts of the park should remain wilderness views; this will not happen if development along Sandy Point Road takes place. The primary 219 focus should be the condition and experience inside the park and not the `viewscape' from the boundary as referenced in the ADI representation, from a 1988 planning report. People value the secluded areas of the park because they are removed from man made surroundings and are able to enjoy participating in activities in a natural forest. There is ample space in regions outside the park boundaries for development to proceed, and changes to the Park should be limited to new or better entrances which do not alter the state of the park region they access. We cannot let Rockwood Park lose ground. Do not allow housing or commercial development within the Rockwood Park land trust: a process of diminishing Rockwood Park areas begins with this construction. Please be reminded that Rockwood Park is one of Saint John's best assets being one of North America's oldest and largest city parks. It should be preserved in its entirety as a centrepiece which is part of our future, as improvements are made to the rest of the city outside the park. Sincer , Angela Buchan, B.Sc. Electrical Engineering (506) 608 -5450 (c) Anaela.Buchan(i�unb. ca 220 Angela Buchan P.O.Box 9, 280 Hampton Road, Apt 4 Quispamsis, New Brunswick E2E 4M7 January 15, 2011 To: Mayor Court and Common Council Delivered to Common Clerk's Office January 18, 2001 8'' Floor City Hall Dear Mayor Court and Council, I am writing my 8h letter regarding proposed residential building within Rockwood Park and adjacent lands. You would be aware of my position by now. I do not think it is prudent or necessary to sell property within or adjacent to Rockwood Park and I am contrary- minded to ADI's and staff reports recommendations. As I have been consistently saying, as a developer and individual that lives on Sandy Point Road, there is no logical or economic advantage of following ADI's and staffs recommendations. They both suggest that the City requires medium and high density housing developments within what is existing park and adjacent lands that were purchased or donated to become part of the park (not a subdivision). There has been no formal market evaluation or cost/benefit studies to back up ADI's or staff's recommendation and, in fact, the current suggestions will likely lead to catastrophic financial implications, not to mention destruction of an environmental treasure valued by most citizens of the City, not only people who live in the immediate area. Recent experience /situations should be a valuable lesson showing that anything but single family housing, in this area, has minimal market value and certainly contraindicates using any of the lands of Rockwood Park and adjacent land (which the City would like to call "Surplus Lands ", despite we all know that the adjacent lands were purchased to expand the Park, not for subdivision development). I would like to explain what I am, specifically, talking about in my first paragraph. We were told by Jackie Hamilton, in her November address to common council, that the city can expect only mild/minimal growth over the next several years, in fact, we may see increasinglongoing loss of Saint John's population since taxes keep going up and currently council has approved megaprojects than may have cost over runs. With what we are all hearing from the provincial and federal governments, there will be less and less "bailout" monies available, in the future. Many previous residents of Saint John have out migrated to Rothesay and the surrounding bedroom communities. They have moved to those areas for several reasons but as gas continues to climb (and is not expected to lower rates, in the future), there may be advantages of residents that have moved to Rothesay and surrounding areas to move back to Saint John if appropriate and higher value developments are brought to market. Most, if not all of this target population lives in single family homes and do not want to live in apartments or townhouses. Specifically, as a medical doctor, I am aware of 40 plus physicians that have been initially interested in my land (but my development was not ready at the time they wanted to purchase). Hence, they recently built their houses within Hasting's Cove, Kennebecasis Park, and Rothesay proper (off Grove Avenue). I have been to several of their houses and they are consistently valued at more than $ 1,000,000.00 and a few worth more than $ 4.3 million. As I have mentioned, these individuals and their families would have built in my development, as they had exhibited significant interest (my property has 270 degree extensive water views from Grand Bay to Gondola Point, across 221 the Milkish River and Kennebecasis Island and within 30 second drive to the hospital and UNBSJ). A small part of my development would have extensive views of Rockwood Park and the golf course, and some views show the downtown core including the Harbour and the Cruise Ships, when in port. In any case, none of these vistas exist on the south side of Sandy Point Road (Rockwood Park and adjacent property). In addition, medium and high density development adjacent and around their potential homes would destroy the significant amenity of Rockwood Park and the golf course. Therefore ADI and staff reports would not help lure residents from Rothesay or other bedroom communities and, in fact, devalue my proposed development which is estimated to generate $100,000,000.00 to $1,250,000.00 gross sales with existing RS -2 zoning. I have told Brian White, Ken Forrest, and Mayor Court that I would be willing to honestly sit down and discuss whether or not medium and high density development, if so much needed could be done in the front end of my development immediately across the road from the Park and it's golf course and, hence, none of the land of Rockwood Park and "surplus land" intended to expand Rockwood Park would be saved with no cost to the City (negating the need to move hole 18, maintenance shed, and very significant infrastructure upgrades such as rebuilding/re- configuring parts of the golf course, new sidewalks, fire hydrants, new lighting fixtures, widening of Sandy Point Road and upgrades for safety along Sandy Point Road which has high volumes of traffic from the hospital and University that will be required with ADI' S and staff s recommendation). One way to increase the population in the area is not to touch the south side of SPR but to increase density within existing and proposed developments directly across the road (north side of SPR). Specifically, I have reconfigured my draft /initial plans to include available land from RS -2 to incorporate some higher density housing, RM, if required/advisable. Perhaps, Fieldstone Estates could also modify their plans to include mixed density (RM) in their subdivision. Other developments in the area have already been zoned for higher density, if required/needed. However, I must point out that currently there is minimal need for medium to high density housing based on the experience of the developer of Rocky Hills subdivision. I have heard he had no plans for single family housing but was zoned medium to high density housing. He spent millions of dollars and had to reduce his prices for his townhouses 3 times, to the point he has not even broke even with the costs of building these townhouses. He, basically, lost his shirt on medium density housing (only sold 7 units in a year, at significantly reduced prices) and has abandoned plans to build his high density condos /apartments since there is no demand for high or medium density housing in this particular area of Millidgeville /SPR. People who live here and have immigrated to the area (including myself) want single family homes with some land (seen as a significant amenity). Basically, the experience of this one developer is a lesson to me and others with nearby developments that this area lends itself to high quality, single family homes with the amenities that are currently in place. Basically, this feels like country living (better than Rothesay, where I once lived) and the amenity of pristine, undeveloped Paris and magnificent River views will draw people from Rothesay and other bedroom communities, Scarring the Park with medium to high density development will ruin the appeal/amenity of the park and golf course and devalue my development, as well as others in the immediate area. This neighborhood does not lend itself to medium to high density development and, as mentioned, we can see that Rocky Hill development is a perfect current example of failure with that 222 mindset/idea for that mode of development. As I am aware, neither ADI nor staff have bought into a cost/benefit assessment and market demand analysis based on all their recommendations /ideas suggesting medium to high density housing (townhouses /apartment structures) with no desire for single family residential ( "P" and RI -A zoning) in this neighborhood. As mentioned, the failure of Rocky Hills suggest medium to high density housing is not desired here and may lead the City down the Garden Path to significant financial losses not to mention ruination of our gem, Rockwood Park. Moreover, a cost/benefit study may show that any gains in sales on the south side of the road may be more than offset by devaluation of developments across the street (north side of SPR) in which the existing Park (status quo) is a significant amenity, whereas medium to high density on the park side (south side of SPR) may not sell {just like Rocky Hills) and devaluation of existing and proposed private development on the north side of the road may lead to significantly loss of income at the expense of the City, the taxpayers, and, certainly, for me who owns an extensive, planned, high value development. Basically, planning for this neighborhood has not been fully thought out, costed out, and has been rushed for no apparent reason to myself or any of the neighbors (SPRNG) and people who value the Park (FORP). I am going to suggest that the process be slowed down and planning/council should listen more intently to the stakeholders in this community. Additionally, based on what I have talked about in this letter there seems to be little demand for townhouses and apartment buildings in this neighborhood since Rocky Hills development has been a dismal failure. A market analysis study and a cost/benefit study should be enacted before any more decisions are made regarding this neighborhood. Sticking stubbornly to ADI's and Staff s recommendations may lead to a very negative financial situation for the City and its taxpayers. Additionally, once residential development of the Park has been initiated the loss of the valued amenity of Rockwood Park would be permanently destroyed. This would be a significant loss to the citizen's of Saint John and the desirability of this neighborhood for legitimate, well thought out and well financed private development, once the significant Park amenity has been permanently destroyed. In any case, I think that the consultation process was very flawedibiased from the beginning (and had nothing to do with science /impartial scientific study) and the decision path, on this project, has been rushed for, as yet, any publicly known reason. I do feel destroying the amenity and natural beauty of Rockwood Park, for what may be little public interest in townhouses and apartments, would be a huge and irreversible mistake for all involved. Hence, I hope you pay attention to this letter and others you are about to receive because the upcoming decision is so very important and will be irreversible once the damage has been done to this valued part of the City. Sincerely, Darrell Gallant, BSc., M.D., LMCC President 504 -474 NB Ltd. (Eagle's Nest Estates) 223 From: Bill Eifler [ mailto:wjeiFler @nb.sympatico.ca] Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2011 12:52 PM To: External - CommonClerk Subject: Sandy Point Road Area Re: Residential /Commercial Development of Lands In or Adjacent to Rockwood Park I think it is absolutely deplorable that Common Council would even consider residential /commercial development of lands in or adjacent to Rockwood Park. Such development would not only destroy beautiful and unique natural environments but would restrict access to and diminish the value of existing public recreational land. Rather than allowing residential /commercial development of this land, Council should be looking to expand Rockwood Park by acquiring more privately owned land adjacent to the park and incorporating this land and the other land in question into Rockwood Park, thereby providing a buffer between this wonderful community resource and unchecked development. There is ample undeveloped and partially developed land within Saint John, including land in the area of Rockwood Park on the opposite side of Sandy Point Road, for development without destroying this natural heritage. Council, and all Saint John residents, should be justifiably proud of this wonderful asset that is Rockwood Park, and should seek to protect it rather than destroy even a small fraction of it. Respectively, W. J. Eifler wOli;avwJ. E, Ph/1) P.E (Retired) 224 Tibbits, Kelly From: Gormley, Elizabeth Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2011 4:13 PM To: Tibbits, Kelly: Chown, Jeanne Cc: Taylor, Jonathan Subject: FW: NO REZONING From: Betty Lizotte [mailto:blizotte @nb.sympatico.ca] Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 20113:58 PM To: Gormley, Elizabeth Subject: NO REZONING To: Mayor and Council c/o Common Clerk 8th Floor City Hall Saint John NB Rockwood Park boundaries, as we the people of Saint John and area have always understood, are as they appear on the city issued maps of Rockwood Park. Given that city staff seems unable or unwilling to confirm otherwise, we know that the boundaries as noted on the city maps are correct. Therefore, absolutely NO REZONING to permit residential or commercial development must take place on these lands that are Rockwood Park. Betty Lizotte 1 l4 Sandy Point Road Saint John NB E2K 3118 506- 652 -3597 225 From: Kristy McClellan [mailto:kristypsu03 @hotmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 20114:19 PM To: External - CommonClerk; Higgins, Patty Subject: Sandy Point Road Area I am a resident of the North End. This letter is to voice my opinion that I do not support any residential development along the Sandy Point Road study area. I am sending this letter to oppose ADI's and City Staffs recommendations and as requested by council delivering this letter to you before January 19, 2011 as indicated in the newspaper. Kristy McClellan 226 Chown, Jeanne From: Taylor, Jonathan on behalf of External - CommonClerk Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2011 4:13 PM To: Chown, Jeanne Subject: FW: Sandy Point Road Planning Study From: Neil Baines [mailto:ae436 @chebucto.ca] Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 20113:56 PM To: External - CommonClerk; External - CommonClerk Subject: Sandy Point Road Planning Study Neil Baines Apt 414, 55 Magazine St Saint John, N.B. E2K 2S5 City of Saint John Planning Department Saint John City Council I urge the panning department and council to not allow any rezoning or further development of city owned land along the south side of Sandy Point Road in lands traditionally regarded as either Rockwood Park or abutting Rockwood Park and in particular the developments proposed by AdI in their recent consultant's study. Whether the lands in question are legally in the par or not ultimately does not matter, since they are owned by the city, abut and are contiguous to and have long been considered part of Rockwood Park. This is a sensitive ,important area of the park that would be negatively impacted by noise, domestic animals, light leachate and runoff of various pollutants from traffic and residences. The proposed development is egregiously out of place in this area. It is aesthetically antithetical and incompatible to the very nature of a park like Rockwood. People do not go to a park with the idea of hiking, biking skiing etc. next to an apartment building parking lot or someone's backyard. Also the people living in that proposed housing might not like people using their streets to access the park. The whole park should not all be like Lily Lake or Fisher Lake. Quiet areas to commune with nature are needed as well. . I was born in Saint John, like Saint John and lived here for my first 27 years. I then moved to Halifax for 30 years where I witnessed the deleterious combination of aggressive developers marketing lakefront views and supine councils and the resulting irrevocable urban sprawl, which have had a very negative effect on both the quality of life and the city's financial bottom line. 227 I have been back in Saint John for 3 years and 1 and my relatives enjoy Rockwood Park. It is an asset which is obviously greatly enjoyed by the community and not just in the Lily and Fisher Lake portions. Many people, including myself also value and use the quieter areas in the park such as the subject lands for walking, skiing ,snowshoeing, cycling and communing with nature. The community has I believe voiced its strong opposition to the insidious encroachment on the Park represented by these proposals. Moreover unlike many recreational facilities this area of the park costs the city almost nothing to maintain. People do not want a trade of toxic Howes lake for treasured pristine parkland. What a transparently cynical travesty of a suggestion. Moreover I don't think people want a Coney Island in this area of the park. Leave it as it is. Sometimes you can't improve on Mother Nature. Study after study shows active recreation improves health and reduces the burden on our medical system. This park has acted as a catalyst for people getting back into cycling , hiking skiing etc. It is like magnet that draws and retains residents to our city Now to be honest and blunt Saint John has suffered, and not without some justification from a bad reputation both regionally and even nationally as a city blighted by pollution and other problems. Keeping assets like Rockwood Park and the Irving Nature Park pristine serve as excellent antidotes to correcting that impression when we try to convince people and businesses to visit or locate here. On the other hand approving development in land that up to now has at least been considered park will send a signal to those that the city does not put a priority on parks and recreation and has a planning process that while nominally solicits public opinion goes ahead and ignores it. If this rezoning is approved it will defeat the purpose and make a sham of Plan SJ. If any development is to take place in this area it makes more sense on the other side of the road where there are already several developments in process. Why would the City try to compete with them when they are having trouble selling existing lots . Finally Sandy Point Road is de facto being used as an exit and entrance route from other parts of the city. It can be very busy to the point of being unsafe. Adding further traffic to what should as much as possible be a limited access route is flagrantly unwise. Council think of the city as a whole and your legacy. Do you want to go down in history as the council that sold oft one of Saint Johns best and best known assets Yours Truly Neil Baines 228 Chown, Jeanne From: Taylor, Jonathan on behalf of External - CommonClerk Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2011 11:32 AM To: Chown, Jeanne Subject: FW: Sandy Point Road Area Planning Study From: pcblaney [mailto:pcblaney @rogers.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2011 10:42 AM To: External - CommonClerk Subject: Sandy Point Road Area Planning Study To Mayor and members of Common Council I don't agree with the recommendations from City staff and those from ADI previous report.) don't want to see Rockwood Park and adjacent lands sold.My vision of Rockwood Park is one that is expanded not shrunken.) would like to see Rockwood park connected to an restored Marsh Creek water shed.As well I would like to see the city purchase if needed lands to connect Rockwood Park to Tucker Park and create a trail system.As well the city needs to provide bus's to Rockwood Park.Move Cherry Brook Zoo closer to the city proper ,I would think the area round the upper parking lot of Fisher Iakes.And have Community gardens in or around all of Rockwood Park. I believe that the Mayor and the majority of Councillors have really botched up this issue.They need to have the courage to admit that they are wrong.And start over. I was at the ACAP meeting where the environment Minister announced that the Province will partner with ACAPSJ to establish a wetland restoration inventory for the Greater Saint John area.) was told that ACAPSJ will be updating their reports on the major watersheds in Saint John That the reports will be ready by the end of the year.Also it is my understanding that the province is doing reports on the effects of climate change on province and our municipalities. Then there is the opportunity that UNBSJ can provide with their Urban and Community Studies Institute.There is no rush, other than that being push by the Mayor.lt is time to slow down and reflect and for the public good start over.Wait for the much needed valuable information to be compiled and dispersed to the general public.Depolitize the issue work with UNBSJ a new Plan SJ and the citizens of SAINT JOHN. Sincerely Phil Blaney 403 Lancaster St Saint John NB E2M 1 Q Ph# 645 9558 229 Chown, Jeanne From: Taylor, Jonathan on behalf of External - CommonClerk Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2011 11:32 AM To: Chown, Jeanne Subject: FW: Objection to Rockwood Park residential development - - - -- Original Message---- - From: Elizabeth McGahan [mailto:emcgahan @nbnet.nb.ca] Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2011 10:54 AM To: External - CommonClerk Cc: emcgahan @unbsj.ca Subject: Objection to Rockwood Park residential development Dear Ms Gormley, I read this morning's newspaper coverage on the Rockwood Park issue. I object strongly to the city's planned residential development of any part of Rockwood Park. Would you kindly forward my message to the Mayor and city officials? Thank you, Elizabeth McGahan 1107 Rothesay Road Saint John, NB E21-1 21-19 633 -2997 1 230 Chown, Jeanne From: Taylor, Jonathan on behalf of External - CommonClerk Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2011 11:37 AM To: Chown, Jeanne Subject: FW: Citizen Feedback Form submission - - - -- Original Message---- - From: noreply @saintjohn.ca [mailto:noreply @saintjohn.ca] Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2011 10:12 AM To: CommunicationsSJ Subject: Citizen Feedback Form submission To whom it may concern, The following data was submitted on the Citizen Feedback Form form: Name I Nom: Heather Trenholm Subject I Sujet: General Inquiry I Enquete generale Comments I Commentaires: I just wanted to voice my oppostion to the re- zoning around Rockwood Park poroosed by the Mayor and some Councillors. I have read many of the articles and statements from the Mayor, Councillors and others. I believe we have a unique opportunity to preserve this area and we should do so. Let's concentrate on other areas of development such as what Darrell Gallant is proposing. We only have one chance to do this right. Address j Adresse: Saint John Telephone I Telephone: Email I Courriel : htandkt(@nb.sympatico.ca THIS IS AN AUTO- RESPONSE. PLEASE DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL 1 231 February 19, 2011 Your Worship the Mayor and Members of Common Council Re: Sandy Point Road Planning Study Development of City -owned lands along Sandy Point Road Permit me to add my voice to those against the sale and development of city -owned lands in or near Rockwood Park for multi - family housing . If Council is truly committed to the re- development of Crescent Valley and of the other "priority neighbourhoods" they will recognize that adding to the supply of available land for multi - family development will work against those possibilities. Based upon the last 5 years of CMHC annual reports of multi -unit construction in the Saint John CMA , it is unreasonable to believe that there will be enough multi -unit housing construction within a generation to develop Crescent Valley to its potential (13 75 new units), to fill the vacant lands along Waterloo or Main Streets or elsewhere in older neighbourhoods. By adding to the available supply of developable land the city will diminish the probability of achieving its oft expressed goals of strengthening our priority neighbourhoods. Yours BArch, AANB 21 Teck St Saint John, N.B. 232 Chown, Jeanne From: Taylor, Jonathan on behalf of External - CommonClerk Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2011 2:08 PM To: Chown, Jeanne Subject: FW: Sandy Point Road Area - - - -- Original Message---- - From: Linda Eifler [mailto:leifler @royallepage.ca] Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2011 12:37 PM To: External - CommonClerk Subject: Sandy Point Road Area I find the idea of development in the Rockwood Park area deplorable. This should not take place. Such a beautiful park in the city of Saint John should remain as it was intended for the enjoyment of all the city's residents and its visitors. We are so proud of our park and the fact that it is one of the most beautiful and largest in all of Canada's cities. Sincerely, Linda Eifler Linda Eifler leifler(@royallepage.ca www.lindaeifler.ca <http: / /www.lindaeifler.ca /> 506- 653 -7338 (cell) 506- 658 -6440 (office) 506 -658 -1149 (fax) toll free: 1 -800- 775 -0077 1 233 From: Seth Asimakos [mailto;loanfund @nbnet,nb,ca] Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 12;03 AM To: External - Planning; External - CommonClerk Subject: Sandy Point Road Area I am writing in support of un- altering the boundaries currently considered as Rockwood Park. I am in Rockwood Park with my family at least three times a week in every season. I am amazed at what the park offers in wilderness view and in recreational opportunity. From biking, walking, swimming, sliding, skating, and fishing. If we allow developments to encroach into this I am afraid we will begin eroding what we have. It is a jewel, It is a place to rejuvenate. Property taxes have been paid as if the disputed lands were park. Why? Because that is what everyone believed them to be. Let's find other ways to create development and tax base in Saint John. Thankyou I ........................... Seth Asimakos 304.5 Princess St. 651 -6839 234 From: Sherry Cunningham [mailto:sherrtom @nb.sympatico.ca] Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 20117:06 PM To: External - CommonClerk Subject: Rockwood Park Proposed Development Mayor and Council I am vehemently opposed to any, I mean any, development in Rockwood Park or as you state " outside the park ". If you look at the original agreement granting the citizens of Saint John use of the park, it was meant for recreational purpose only!!! Here we are, in Saint John, listed as being the only city in Canada to have such a park such as this in the middle of the City. Only Vancouver's Stanley Park comes close. Stop this nonsense and tear down and develop slum sections of the City that need "affordable housing ". I can't voice my displeasure enough with this situation. Please stop this outrageous proposal. Sherry Cunningham 107 Rivershore Drive Saint John, NB E2K 4X4 sherrtomArib.sympatico.ca 235 From: Kristy McClellan [mailto:kristypsu03 @hotmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 20114:19 PM To: External - CommonClerk; Higgins, Patty Subject: Sandy Point Road Area I am a resident of the North End. This letter is to voice my opinion that I do not support any residential development along the Sandy Point Road study area. I am sending this letter to oppose ADI's and City Staffs recommendations and as requested by council delivering this letter to you before January 19, 2011 as indicated in the newspaper. Kristy McClellan 236 �=ZL 5 237 z n pr Q 1 SZc� a �Q� �_ �• �L C� �� �.ln A � nQn\.5 W-1 CA- �- pQ Lz-n "mil OAR, To: Mayor Court and Council Via Common Clerk 8th Floor City Hall Saint John HAND DELIVERED Rockwood Park and adjacent lands are not for salE recommendations from City Stall and/or ADI's previous report. I do ni density development (townhouses /apartment buildings, etc properties of the Park. I am sending this letter to oppose ADI's recommendations as requested by council delivering this letter before Ja in the newspaper. Signed:x� %��i� Address: Telephone #: e;) ERG 240 Welcome e Rockwood Park To: Mayor Court and Council via Common Clerk 8th Pin C..ihi Wnll Saint John HAND DELIVERED Page 1 of 1 RocinuMri Park and Mdin _,ent lgnA� Mre nn4 f ^r colo { An nn enrm �sr� ra�nmmnnr{ntinnc fm r'ifir C4off and /or ADI's previous report. I do not want inappropriate high density development (town houses/apartment buildings, etc.) in my Park or adjacent properties of the Park. I am sending this letter to nnnncA Ard1c nnri r'it%j rPrnrpmAnri7t {nnc anti nc rampQtAri hit sound! Homjiuprinn this letter to you before January 1 U, 1011 as indicated In the newspaper. sigre± : -I t• L r> Jk / 67 �i Address: c )1' ri -LL6 I /S I CIepi m ie 4. ( Oo http:// www. saverockwoodpark .com/Welcome.htm1241 1/17/2011 Save Rockwood Park To: Mayor Court and Council via Common Clerk 6th Floor City Hall Saint John HAND DELIVERED Rockwood Park and adjacent lands are not for sale. I do not agree with recommendations from City Staff and/or ADI's previous report. I do not want inappropriate high density development (townhouses/apartment buildings, etc.) in my Park or adjacent properties of the Park..[ am sending this letter to oppose ADI's and City Staffs recommendations and as requested by council delivering this letter to you before January 19, 2011 as indicated in the newspaper. Signed: Address: Telephone #: 6 .SY % - S la a 242 Save Rockwood Park To: Mayor Court and Council via Common Clerk 8th Floor City Hall Saint John HAND DELIVERED Rockwood Park and adjacent lands are not for sale. I do not agree with recommendations from City Staff and/or ADI's previous report. I do not want inappropriate high density development (townhouses /apartment buildings, etc.) in my Park or adjacent properties of the Park. I am sending this letter to oppose ADI's and City Staffs recommendations and as requested by council delivering this letter to you before Ja " ary 1 11 as indicated in the newspaper. Signed: r f (� >+'l pNt/ �f 9/�! "S� 0 (�t/. Address: i, Telephone #: 243 Save Rockwood Park To: Mayor Court and Council via Common Clerk 8th Floor City Hall Saint John HAND DELIVERED Rockwood Park and adjacent lands are not for sale. I do not agree with recommendations from City Staff and/or ADI's previous report, I do not want inappropriate high density development (townhouses /apartment buildings, etc.) in my Park or adjacent properties of the Park. I am sending this letter to oppose ADI's and City Staffs recommendations and as requested by council delivering this letter to you before January 19, 2011 as indicated in the newspaper. Signed: Address: U Telephone #: 4�1l1 f 244 Save Rockwood Park To: Mayor Court and Council via Common Clerk 8th Floor City Hall Saint John HAND DELIVERED Rockwood Park and adjacent lands are not for sale. I do not agree with recommendations from City Staff and/or AD I's previous report. I do not want inappropriate high density development (townhouses /apartment buildings, etc.) in my Park or adjacent properties of the Park. I am sending this letter to oppose ADI's and City Staffs recommendations and as requested by council delivering this letter to you before January 18, 2011 as indicated in the newspaper. Signed: 4/t/v �/t.� Address: 616 C—C '4vc_. , J C_( ^ -/ `'c' Telephone #: G516 - C) 47-L.- 245 Save Rockwood Park To: Mayor Court and Council via Common Clerk 8th Floor City Hall Saint John HAND DELIVERED Rockwood Park and adjacent lands are not for sale. I do not agree with recommendations from City Staff and /or ADI's previous report. I do not want inappropriate high density development (townhouses /apartment buildings, etc.) in my Park or adjacent properties of the Park. I am sending this letter to oppose ADI's and City Staffs recommendations and as requested by council delivering this letter to you before January 19, 2011 as indicated in the newspaper. Signed: Address: ( (') A i V e r .L . We L /' Telephone #: lS 0 6 � r S " ! c 246 Save Rockwood Park To: Mayor Court and Council via Common Clerk 8th Floor City Hall Saint John HAND DELIVERED Rockwood Park and adjacent lands are not for sale. I do not agree with recommendations from City Staff and/or ADI's previous report. I do not want inappropriate high density development (townhouses /apartment buildings, etc.) in my Park or adjacent properties of the Park. I am sending this letter to oppose ADI's and City Staffs recommendations and as requested by council delivering this letter to you before January 19, 2011 as indicated in the newspaper. Signed: Address: S- V '78 � Telephone #: v�- J 36 5�-� 247 Save Rockwood Park To: Mayor Court and Council via Common Clerk 8th Floor City Hall Saint John HAND DELIVERED Rockwood Park and adjacent lands are not for sale. I do not agree with recommendations from City Staff and/or ADI's previous report. I do not want inappropriate high density development (townhouses /apartment buildings, etc.) in my Park or adjacent properties of the Park. I am sending this letter to oppose ADI's and City Staffs recommendations and as requested by council delivering this letter to you before January 19, 2011 as indicated in the newspaper. r Signed: �Q /7 Address: /Ie Al / Telephone #: 248 Save Rockwood Park To: Mayor Court and Council via Common Clerk 8th Floor City Half Saint John HAND DELIVERED Rockwood Park and adjacent lands are not for sale. I do not agree with recommendations from City Staff and/or ADI's previous report. I do not want inappropriate high density development (townhouses/apartment buildings, etc.) in my Park or adjacent properties of the Park. l am sending this letter to oppose ADI's and City Staffs recommendations and as requested by council delivering this letter to you before January 19, 2011 as indicated in the newspaper. Signed: / &J C� '�. Gtfil i 21✓ Address: C /i w1 C 3 H 7 Telephone #: .5-0 — 5' It 7 ) 249 Save Rockwood Park To: Mayor Court and Council via Common Clerk 8th Floor City Hall Saint John HAND DELIVERED Rockwood Park and adjacent lands are not for sale, I do not agree with recommendations from City Staff and /or ADI's previous report. I do not want inappropriate high density development (townhouses/apartment buildin etc.) in my Park or adjacent properties of the Park. I am sending this letter to oppose ADI's and Ci Sta s recommendations and as requested by council delivering this letter to you before January 19 a indicated in a newspaper. Signed: Address: l �� Telephone #: 250 Save Rockwood Park To: Mayor Court and Council via Common Clerk 8th Floor City Hall Saint John HAND DELIVERED Rockwood Park and adjacent lands are not for sale. I do not agree with recommendations from City Staff and/or ADI's previous report. I do not want inappropriate high density development (townhouses/apartment buildings, etc.) in my Park or adjacent properties of the Park, I am sending this letter to oppose ADI's and City Staffs recommendations and as requested by council delivering this letter to you before January 19, 2011 as indicated in the newspaper. Signe Address: Telephone #: 251 Save Rockwood Park To: Mayor Court and Council via Common Clerk 8th Floor City Hall Saint John !-LAND DELIVERED Rockwood Park and adjacent lands are not for sale. I do not agree with recommendations from City Staff and/or ADI's previous report. I do not want inappropriate high density development (townhouses/apartment buildings, etc.) in my Park or adjacent properties of the Park. I am sending this letter to oppose ADI's and City Staffs recommendations and as requested by council delivering this letter to you before January 19, 2011 as indicated in the newspaper. Signed: : QGiCrai'b. Address: f i Telephone #: R1 � 1 d I 252 Save Rockwood Park To: Mayor Court and Council via Common Clerk 8th Floor City Hall Saint John HAND DELIVERED Rockwood Park and adjacent lands are not for sale. I do not agree with recommendations from City Staff and/or ADI's previous report. I do not want inappropriate high density development (townhouses /apartment buildings, etc.) in my Park or adjacent properties of the Park. I am sending this letter to oppose ADI's and City Staffs recommendations and as requested by council delivering this letter to you before January 18, 2011 as indicated in the newspaper. Signed: Address: % f V Telephone #: Ji 06 6 0 0— J K5z 253 Save Rockwood Park To: Mayor Court and Council via Common Clerk 8th Floor City Hall Saint John HAND DELIVERED Rockwood Park and adjacent lands are not for sale. I do not agree with recommendations from City Staff and/or ADI's previous report. I do not want inappropriate high density development (townhouses/apartment buildings, etc.) in my Park or adjacent properties of the Park. I am sending this letter to oppose AD I's and City Staffs recommendations and as requested by council delivering this letter to you before January 19, 2011 as indicated in the newspaper. dw- Address: 14 PL @_f Telephone #: A 254 January 31, 2011 Mayor Ivan Court and members of Common Council, I submit the following : Motion: That Saint John Common Council declare an official "Bobby Hayes Day" to recognize this outstanding citizen for his selfless commitment to the betterment of the lives of our local youth , and his inspiration as a role model to us all. Respectfully, (received by email) Councillor Patty Higgins lo, — SAINT JOHN P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, NB Canada E21- 41-1 I www.saintjohn.ca I C.P. 1971 Saint John, N. -B. Canada E21- 41-1 --------- 255 i1wccgoFa=[]ohn January 27, 2011 His Worship Ivan Court and Members of Common Council Your Worship and Councillors: Subject: External & Internal Communications Strategy for City of Saint John An external communication strategy which establishes and provides reliable and effective opportunities for sharing information and community consultation is critical to the overall success of the City of Saint John's customer service delivery model. An internal communication strategy which performs well as a result of clear expectations with regard to the reliability and frequencies of reports and updates will create synergies between staff, boards, agencies, commissions and Council. External Communication An external communication strategy should ultimately fulfill the expectations that all pertinent and appropriate information is being shared with the general public. There should be effective and various ways for citizens to interact conveniently with City Hall in order to share opinions, express concerns and make customer service requests. As we acknowledge the great work being done by our City's communications department, let's continue to pursue excellence as we seek to continuously improve and create opportunities for meaning dialogue between City Hall and the Citizen's of Saint John. As a part of this process, let's continue to support ways to enhance communication with citizens and accessibility with City Hall by ensuring the: Further promotion of our City's new website. The establishment of our new website helped our municipality in delivering an outstanding online customer service resource with many useful features. For example, there is a resource comparable to "fixmystreet.com" which allows citizens to upload pictures of potholes when expressing concerns and submitting requests for work. Implementation of a 311 Phone Service. In July 2008, 1 suggested the municipality create a 311 city phone service that would provide one number to access information on all city services. This phone system will create better accessibility, responsiveness and efficiencies by linking people with resources and vital service supports. "Same day response" standards and the tracking of inquiries are key elements of this system. I am pleased that the city manager has indicated in this year's budget summary that we can expect the completion of the Customer Service process review, resulting in the implementation of improvements. An increased number of Ward meetings. In January 2011, Council committed to holding additional Ward meetings where and when deemed appropriate. This year's budget allocates funds to insure we provide a greater number of meetings to engage citizens through consultation. SAINT JOHN P.O. lox 1371 Saint john, N$ Canada E2L 4L1 I ww ,sainQohn.cn I CA 1971 Saint fohn, N U, Canada E2L 4LI 256 Increased use of Twitter. I have heard individuals express to me the importance of City Hall being more active in engaging the community by utilizing Twitter. Along with Facebook, this medium provides our organization with a new level of interaction with an ever - growing demographic. Twitter could also be another way to inform citizens of things such as snow bans. Internal Communication An infernal communication strategy should ultimately fulfill the expectations that all pertinent and appropriate information is being shared between departments, Commissions, Agencies, boards and Common Council. Implementation of the following items may assist us in enhancing internal communication at City Hall: In January 2009, 1 wrote Common Council expressing the need to create clear expectations to ensure an acceptable level of interaction between the agencies, boards and commissions with Common Council. After all, many of these bodies exist to offer advice to Council and it is imperative to ensure there is routine communication and reporting taking place. Common Council should be made aware of all prospective projects being pursued by the City. Council members should also be regularly informed of all community events and announcements /press conferences. This clearly is not an exhaustive list of current or potential future elements of our City's External and Internal Communication Strategy. Motion: I propose that the city manager present a brief report to Common Council highlighting the key components of our City's internal and external communication strategy. This report will also provide an update on the action being taken with regard the various items outlined above. Respectively Submitted, (received by e-mail) Councillor Snook (P. - - __ SAINT JOHN F.O. Box 1971 SairEt john, NE Canada E2L4L1 I www.sai;nt0hn,ca � CA 1971 Saint}ohn, N U, Canada E2L4LI 257 1 January 27, 2011 His Worship Ivan Court and Members of Common Council Your Worship and Councillors: Subject: Legislative Power to create City By Laws I wholeheartedly agree with a recent commentary published in the Telegraph Journal on January 22, 2011 with regard to a municipality's lack of power and authority to create and subsequently implement its own by laws.* It is interesting to note that other jurisdictions in Canada allow greater authority to municipalities to regulate their own affairs. Our inability to create our own by laws has become especially problematic with regard to vacant and derelict buildings. While I am committed to the process of securing support from our provincial counterparts on this issue, it is important to take a look at the "bigger picture" and explore the possibility of advocating for the implementation of a better system in New Brunswick. The goal is to establish a more efficient system that allows municipalities to have more authority to manage its own affairs and legislate for themselves. Motion: I propose the City Manager present a report to Council with regard to the action our municipality could take to advocate for changes to the legislative process in the passing of civic laws and regulations. Respectively Submitted, (received by e-mail) Councillor Donnie Snook *1 have attached a copy of the Commentary published in the Telegraph Journal on January 22, 2011. SAINT JOHN P.O. Sox 1X171 Saint WhrF, N5 Canada E2L 40 I www. Wntjohn.ca I C.P. 1971 Sairht john, N. -E, Canada ESL 4L1 258 Commentary as appeared in the Telegraph Journal on January 22, 2011: "In most communities across Canada, the question of how to deal with derelict properties is strictly a local issue. That's because municipalities outside New Brunswick have greater power to regulate their own affairs. In this province, councils need the provincial legislature to pass amendments before new bylaw powers can be applied - a lengthy procedure that is virtually guaranteed to fail. This failure is exemplified by Saint John's ongoing quest for tough restrictions on derelict buildings. Saint John 101 derelict properties and the number has been increasing each year. These buildings pose a hazard to the public. They attract curious children and teens, shelter criminal activity, and provide a convenient target for arsonists. The number of fires in these structures doubled in 2010, endangering neighbourhoods. There are procedures for condemning buildings that pose a fire hazard, but the process is long and cumbersome. Saint John council has drafted a bylaw that would give the city the power to demolish properties after 120 days, if landlords ignore repair orders. It's an expedited solution to an urgent problem - but that urgency is not felt at the provincial level, where the changes must be made. The slowness of the legislative process is driving a wedge between provincial policymakers and civic politicians. This frustration could easily be avoided: just give municipalities the power to legislate for themselves. It is ridiculous to think the provincial assembly can micromanage the affairs of every community. For the sake of improving efficiency at both levels, legislators should give full power over bylaws to communities - trusting those elected locally to make local decisions." (P. - - -- SAINT JOHN F.O. Box 1971 SairEt john, NE Canada E2L4L1 I www.sai;ntichn,ca � CA 1971 Saint}ohn, Canada E2L4LI 259 1 January 27, 2011 His Worship Ivan Court and Members of Common Council Your Worship and Councillors: Subject: Vacant and derelict buildings Legislation In August 2008, Saint John City Council began a process to create a strategy to reduce the number of vacant and derelict buildings around our city. Our Building Inspection Department was given a directive from council to take a more aggressive approach in dealing with this issue. In April 2009, Council affirmed a newly written by law. Since then, Council appointed Councillor Peter McGuire to work with the Provincial Government to get this new legislation passed. In my opinion, all members of Council should be active in advocating for the passing of this legislation. On January 7, 2011 1 wrote a letter to Premier Alward and the MLA's of the Greater Saint John area expressing my support for the passage of the above mentioned legislation. I suggest that all members of Council take the opportunity to write letters, send emails and make calls to our political Provincial counterparts in an attempt to support and compliment the efforts already underway to advance this file. Let's be vigilant in our efforts! Motion: Receive and file. Respectively Submitted, (received by e-mail) Councillor Donnie Snook q� SAINT JOHN P.O. Sox 1 SM Saint IphrF, N5 Canxh E2L 40 I www. Wntjahnxa I C.P. 1971 Sairo# john, N. -E, Canada EA 4L1 260 The City of Saint John January 31, 2011 Your Worship Mayor Ivan Court & Members of Common Council: Issue: Vacant / Derelict Building Legislation -- Correlating the Mandate of the Provincial Department of Local Government with the Needs of The City of Saint John Context: • An overview (from their website) of Local Government Services: a) 'developing and / or amending legislation, regulations and policies in response to local government issues and community needs.' b) '...and providing leadership in support of self - sufficient communities.' • The City of Saint John deals with an average of 14 fires per year within vacant and derelict buildings • The next session of the Legislature begins Tuesday March 22, 2011 at 3pm • It is imperative that the Minister of Local Government direct his staff to move aggressively to ensure the legislation The City of Saint John requires on this file is enacted within the next session of the Legislature • It is imperative that the Minister of Local Government demonstrate strong leadership on this critical file • Citizens are supportive of Common Council's efforts on this file • It should be noted that policy makers from The City of Saint John and from the Department of Local Government are convening this week to discuss this file Motion: Received for information Resp tf ly submitted, l e er McGu re SAINT JOHN Councillor —City of Saint John P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, NB Canada E2L 4L1 I www.saintjohn.ca I C.P. 1971 Saint John, N. -B. Canada E2L 4L1 261 Believing in vibrant, viable, self- sufficient communities 0 Who we are... The Department of Local Government (DLG) is the provincial government's primary connection to com- munities throughout the Province of New Brunswick. What we do... Fundamental to the Department's role is building and sustaining relationships with communities and provid- ing leadership in support of self- sufficient communities. To enable strong communities, we provide advisory, educational and legislative support on a range of local government issues. How we do it... Key ways in which the Department provides leadership in support of self - sufficient communities: Council and Administrative Support Community Support Financial Support Council and Administrative Support Provided by: • connecting with municipalities and rural communities and providing capacity building leadership; • educating and engaging stakeholders on local governance issues; and continually developing new and enhancing existing capacity building resources for communities, including enabling legislation; • hosting Municipal Orientation; offering educational workshops and training; and distributing municipal and rural community advisory notices; • liaising with municipal associations of New Brunswick, and federal and provincial counterparts on issues and programs that affect New Brunswick co 6munities. Community Support Web tools. Provided by: The Department of Local • assisting interested communities with considering a number of resources cc and achieving restructuring and the sharing of would benefit communit services to better meet their common needs; organizations and the ge • providing engineering advice; and undertaking infrastructure needs analyses for municipalities and Websites of Note: local service districts (LSDs); The Local Government F • facilitating the provision of services in LSDs (such as nient, self -help web tool fire protection, solid waste collection, emergency for municipal and rural cc measures, and dog control via the NBSPCA) and on the day -to -day admin carrying out day -to -day operations; The Gas Tax Fund and M • developing and /or amending legislation, regulations Guide websites are infon community funding oppi and policies in response to local governance issues and communities needs. The Assessment and Pla is a helpful first stop for a ing their property tax, lar preservation assessment. Financial Support The Community Profiles Provided by: on -line directory of inforr • advising municipalities, rural communities, LSDs and municipalities and rural c commissions on accounting and financial reporting detailed contact informal requirements; provided by New Brunsw • reviewing and approving the annual budgets of To access these and othe visit: www.gnb.ca /localg municipalities, rural communities, LSDs and commissions; • reviewing and approving long term borrowing of municipalities, rural communities and commissions; • calculating and distributing Unconditional Grant support and fine revenue sharing payments to New Brunswick communities; • managing Gas Tax Fund applications of eligible New Brunswick communities to ensure program criteria are met. .i. January 31, 2011 Your Worship Mayor Ivan Court & Members of Common Council: Issue: The Development of an Integrated Neighbourhood Enhancement Initiative for Ocean West Way Context: • The focus would be directed towards the commercial area of the neighbourhood • Has been a chronic problem for over 2 decades • Integrated — issues that may require input from several City Departments • Safe passage for citizens • Some long time residents have given up hope that their neighbourhood will be enhanced • By -law enforcement or the need for by -law changes if necessary • Possible unsightly properties Motion: That the City Manager direct the appropriate Departmental Staff to examine neighbourhood enhancement ideas, and possible policy changes, for the Ocean West Way area. A report back to Council is requested. Respectf ly submi ed, Peter McGuire Councillor — City of Saint John lr _ SAINT JOHN P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, NB Canada E2L 4L1 I www.saintjohn.ca I C.P. 1971 Saint John, N. -B. Canada E2L 41_1 263 1 January 27, 2011 His Worship Ivan Court and Members of Common Council Your Worship and Councillors: Subject: Vacant and derelict buildings and the Fire Prevention Act In August 2008, Saint John City Council began a process to create a strategy to reduce the number of vacant and derelict buildings around our city. Our Building Inspection Department was given a directive from council to take a more aggressive approach in dealing with this issue. In April 2009, Council affirmed a newly written by law. Since then, Council has been working hard to lobby the Provincial Government to get this new legislation passed. I believe, it is critical for Common Council to explore every opportunity at our disposal to achieve a significant reduction of the number of vacant /derelict buildings in Saint John. In my opinion, we need to understand the City of Saint John's Fire Departments capacity to deal with dilapidated and derelict buildings under the provisions of the Fire Prevention Act. I suggest that the Fire Chief present a brief written report with regard to exploring the possibilities and examining the potential of the fire department being utilized in a greater way to address vacant /derelict buildings. Motion: I propose that Common Council receive a brief written report with regard to the fire departments capacity to deal with dilapidated and derelict buildings under the provisions of the Fire Prevention Act. Respectively Submitted, (receive by e-mail) Councillor Donnie Snook q� SAINT JOHN P.O. Sox 1 SM Saint 14hrF, N5 Canxh E2L 40 I www. send ohn.ca I C.P. 1971 Sairht john, N. -E, Canada EA 4L1 264 1 1/28/2011 Your Worship Ivan Court Members of Common Council City of Saint John Dear Mayor Court and Members of Council Motion: Common Council write to the CRTC against allowing the CBC to remove their analog transmission to the residents of Saint John. The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation has applied to the CRTC for permission to stop broadcasting analog signals from their tower on Mount Champlain. This will have the effect of cutting off the transmission to those who live in the Saint John area and receive the signal free via a television antenna (ie. Rabbit ears). The CBC is a public institution and should be accessible by each and every Canadian citizen. By cutting off Saint John residents and forcing them to pay extra for cable or satellite service they are removing that free access. This is wrong and the City of Saint John should be telling the CRTC so. Respectfully Submitted (received by e -mail) Gary Sullivan q� SAINT JOHN P.O. Sox 1 SM Saint 14hrF, N5 Canxh E2L 40 I www. WntOhn.ca I C.P. 1971 Sairht john, N. -E, Canada EA 4L1 265 City Solicitors Office Bureau de Pavocat municipal The City of Saint John January 21, 2011 Common Council of The City of Saint John Your Worship and Councillors: Re: Overnight Winter Parking Restriction Amendment to the Traffic By -Law At its meeting on October 26, 2009, Council resolved to adopt an overnight parking restriction as a policy of Common Council. Our Department prepared amendments to the Traffic By -Law to give effect to this overnight winter parking bank, which amendment received third reading on November 9, 2009. The amendment to the Traffic By -Law resulted in prohibiting the parking of vehicles on any street in the City, except those listed in Schedule "R" between the hours of midnight a,-,d 7:00 a.m. between November 15 and April 15 of each year. The purpose of this amendment was to assist staff in achieving snow clearing service objectives adopted by Council within an updated Winter Management Plan for streets and sidewalks. It also followed a period of public consultation. Since the winter parking ban first took effect in 2009, citizens have brought forward a number of concerns to staff who, after looking into the issue, determined that additional amendments to the Traffic By -Law were necessary from time to time so as to add to Schedule "R" streets where there was a lack of off - street parking thereby exempting said streets from the overnight winter parking ban. More recently, at its meeting on October 12, 2010, Council also resolved, in an attempt to help the citizens adjust to the winter parking ban, to change said ban from "November 15 to April 15" to "December 1 to March 31 ". Then, at its meeting on November 29, 2010, Council resolved that "the letter from Deputy Mayor Chase entitled Winter Parking Ban Lower West Side recommending the suspension of the winter parking ban and implementation of alternating side parking for Winslow St., Guilford St. and Lancaster St. be referred to the City Manager for report; and further, that the report also consider the portion of Douglas Avenue that is currently subject to the winter parking ban ". �r SAINT JOHN P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, NB Canada E2L 41 I www.saintjohn.ca I C.P. 1971 Saint John, N. -B. Canada E2L 41 266 2 Common Council January 21, 2010 At the January 17, 2011 meeting of Council, the City Manager submitted a report in response to the November 29, 2010 resolution above noted. In this report the City Manager recommends that the Traffic By -Law be further amended in order to add some streets to Schedule "R" (streets exempted from the overnight winter parking restriction) and some streets to Schedule "H" (alternate side parking between November 15 and April 30 between midnight and 8:00 a.m.). The same report also recommends that Victoria Lane be removed from Schedule "R ", and therefore subject to the winter parking ban. Attached to this report is an Amendment to the Traffic By -Law which will add three streets to Schedule "R ", add those same three streets plus ten more to Schedule "H" and remove Victoria Lane from Schedule "R ", thereby making Victoria Lane subject to the winter overnight parking ban. Common Council may, if it wishes, give first and second reading to this amendment. Respectfully Submitted, Jo L. Nugent City Solicitor Attachment 267 BY -LAW NO.: A LAW TO AMEND A BY -LAW RESPECTING TRAFFIC ON STREETS IN THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN MADE UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF THE MOTOR VEHICLE ACT, 1973, AND AMENDMENTS THERETO ARRETE NO: ARRETE MODIFIANT L'ARRETE RELATIF A LA CIRCULATION DANS LES RUES DANS THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN EDICTS CONFORMEMENT A LA LOI SUR LES VEHICULES A MOTEUR (1973) ET LES MODIFICATIONS AFFERENTES Be it enacted by the Common Council of Lors d'une reunion du conseil municipal, The City of Saint John as follows: The City of Saint John a decrete ce qui suit : A By -law of The City of Saint John entitled "A By -law Respecting Traffic On Streets In The City of Saint John Made Under The Authority of The Motor Vehicle Act, 1973, and Amendments Thereto ", enacted on the 19'" day of December, A.D. 2005, is hereby amended as follows: 1 Schedule H — Alternate Side Parking November 15 — April 30 - is amended by adding the following words under the following headings : Street Limits Winslow St. Lancaster St. to Watson St. Third St. Cranson Ave. to Dead End Woodlawn St. Catherine St. to Dead End Ave. King St. W. Watson St. to Market Place Saint George Lancaster St. to Watson St. St. Sutton Lancaster St. to City Line Tower St. Watson St. to Ludlow St. Watson St. King St. W to Prince St. Watson St. Saint George St. to Rodney St. Bridge St. Main St. to Dead End Par les presentes, Parretti de The City of Saint John intitule « Arrete relatif a la circulation dans les rues dans The City of Saint John edicte conformement a la Loi sur les vehicules a moteur (1973) et les modifications afferentes », decrete le 19 decembre 2005, est modif.6 comme suit : 1 L'Annexe H — Stationnement unilateral alterne du 15 novembre au 30 avril — est modifiee par Padjonction des mots suivants sous les titres suivants : Rues Limites Rue Winslow de la rue Lancaster a la rue Watson Rue Third de Pave Cranston au cul de sac Ave Woodlawn de la rue St. Catherine au cul de Sac Rue King Ouest de la rue Watson a la place Market Rue St. George de la rue Lancaster a la rue Watson Sutton de la rue Lancaster a la City Line Rue Tower de la rue Watson a la rue Ludlow Rue Watson Rue Watson Rue Bridge de la rue King Ouest a la rue Prince de la rue Saint George a la rue Rodney de la rue Main au cul de sac Waring St. Cunard St. to Dead End Rue Waring de la rue Cunard au cul de sac 268 Gooderich St. Wright St. to Seeley St. Rue Gooderich de la rue Wright a la rue Seeley Rockland Rd. Parks St. to Dead End Ch. Rockland de la rue Parks au cul de sac 2 Schedule R — List of Streets Excluded from 2 L'Annexe R — Liste des rues exemptes de la Winter On- Street Parking Restriction - is amended restriction de stationnement sur rue pendant by adding the following words under the following l'hivers — est modifiee par Padjonction des mots headings : suivants sous les titres suivants : Street Limits Winslow St. Lancaster St. to Watson St. Third St. Cranston Ave. to Dead End Woodlawn St. Catherine St. to Dead End Ave. Rues Limites Rue Winslow de la rue Lancaster a la rue Watson Rue Third de Pave Cranston au cul de sac Ave Woodlawn de la rue St. Catherine au cul de sac 3 Schedule R — List of Streets Excluded from 3 L'Annexe R — Liste des rues exemptes de la Winter On- Street Parking Restriction - is amended restriction de stationnement sur rue pendant by deleting the following words under the Phivers — est modifiee par la suppression des mots following headings : suivants sous les titres suivants : Street Limits Rues Limites Victoria Lane Entire Ruelle Victoria en entier IN WITNESS WHEREOF The City of Saint John EN FOI DE QUOI, The City of Saint John a fait has caused the Corporate Common Seal of the said apposer son sceau municipal sur le present arrete City to be affixed to this by -law the day le 2011, avec les signatures of , A.D. 2011 signed by: suivantes : Mayor /Maire Common Clerk/greffier communal First Reading - Premiere lecture - Second Reading - Deuxieme lecture - Third Reading - Troisieme lecture - 269 LA The City of Saint John January 19, 2011 Common Council of The City of Saint John Your Worship and Councillors: Re: Loch Lomond Road Speed Limit Amendments to the Traffic By -Law City Solicitors Office Bureau de Pavocat municipal At its meeting on November 29, 2010, Common Council resolved to amend the Traffic By -Law to change the speed limit on Loch Lomond Road in different areas. In the City Manager Report which recommended this amendment (M &C 2011 -369), staff divided Loch Lomond Road into four segments in its analysis and concluded that the speed limit for segments 1 and 3 (Bayside Drive to Linda Court, and 300 meters west of McAllister Drive to 300 meters east of Hickey Road, respectively) should be 50 km /h and the speed limit for segments 2 and 4 (Linda Court to 300 meters west of McAllister Drive, and 300 meters east of Hickey Road to Evergreen Avenue, respectively) should be 60 km /h. As Council is aware, Loch Lomond Road used to be a provincial highway. Under section 32 of the Highway Act, the Lieutenant Governor in Council "may declare by proclamation that any highway shall cease to be under the control of the Minister after a day named in the proclamation and such highway shall after such day be in the jurisdiction of the municipality in which it is situated." Section 32 also provides that the soil and freehold of such highway then vests in the municipality named in the proclamation. By letter dated March 14, 2006, the Minister of Transportation wrote to the then Mayor, Mr. Norm McFarlane, advising that effective January 1, 2007, his Department would reclassify Loch Lomond Road from Rothesay Avenue to Route 111 to municipal street. A copy of this letter is attached to this report. Since January 1, 2007, Loch Lomond Road has been a municipal street. Consequently, and because of section 140(1) of the Motor Vehicle Act, the maximum speed limit on Loch Lomond Road has been 50 km /h since January 1, 2007. Subsection 140(1) provides as follows: "Except as otherwise expressly provided in the Act ... no person shall drive a vehicle on a highway at a speed in excess of lr _ SAINT JOHN P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, NB Canada E2L 4L1 I www.saintiohn.ca I C.P. 1971 Saint John, N.-B. Canada E2L 4L1 --tom 270 2 Common Council January 19, 2010 a) 50 kilometers an hour in an urban district..." "Urban district" is defined in the Motor Vehicle Act as being a municipality or rural community under the Municipalities Act. Section 142(1) provides, however, that a local authority (which includes a municipality) may by by -law prescribe a higher or lower rate of maximum speed on highways within its boundaries. The City has, at subsection 18(1) of its Traffic By -Law, prohibited speeds in excess of 60 km /h on the streets listed in Schedule M -1. The attached amendment will result in the desired increase of speed limit to 60 km /h on Loch Lomond Road between Linda Court and a appoint located 300 meters west of McAllister Drive, and between a point located 300 meters east of Hickey Road and Evergreen Avenue. The rest of Loch Lomond Road will maintain a maximum speed limit of 50 km /h. Council may, if it so wishes, give first and second reading to the attached amendment. Respectfully Submitted, Joh . Nugent City Solicitor Attachment 271 BY -LAW No.: A LAW TO AMEND A BY -LAW RESPECTING TRAFFIC ON STREETS IN THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN MADE UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF THE MOTOR VEHICLE ACT, 1973, AND AMENDMENTS THERETO ARRETE No: ARRETE MODIFIANT L'ARRETE RELATIF A LA CIRCULATION DANS LES RUES DE THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN EDICTE CONFORMEMENT A LA LOI SUR LES VEHICULES A MOTEUR (1973) ET MODIFICATIONS AFFERENTES Be it enacted by the Common Council of Lors d'une reunion du conseil municipal, The City of Saint John as follows: The City of Saint John a decrete ce qui suit: A By -law of The City of Saint John entitled "A By -law Respecting Traffic On Streets In The City of Saint John Made Under The Authority of The Motor Vehicle Act, 1973, and Amendments Thereto ", enacted on the 191h day of December, A.D. 2005, is hereby amended as follows: 1 Schedule M -1 — 60 km/h Speed Limit - is amended by adding the following words under the following headings: Street Limits Loch Lomond Rd. Linda Ct. to a point located 300 meters west of McAllister Dr. Loch Lomond Rd. a point located 300 metres east of Hickey Rd. to Evergreen Ave. IN WITNESS WHEREOF The City of Saint John has caused the Corporate Common Seal of the said City to be affixed to this by -law the day of January, A.D., 2011 signed by: Mayor /maire Par les presentes, I'arrete de The City of Saint John intitule « Arrete relatif a la circulation dans les rues de The City of Saint John edict& conformement a la Loi sur les vehicules a moteur (1973) et modifications afferentes », decrete le 19 decembre 2005, est modifie comme suit: 1 L' Annexe M -1 — vitesse maximale autorisee de 60 km/h - est modifiee par Padjonction des mots suivants sous les titres suivants : Rues Limites Ch. Loch Lomond de 1'impasse Linda a un point situ& a 300 metres A 1'Ouest de la Pr. McAllister Ch. Loch Lomond d'un point situ& a 300 metres A 1'Est du ch. Hickey a Favenue Evergreen EN FOI DE QUOI, The City of Saint John a fait apposer son sceau municipal sur le present arrete le janvier 2011, avec les signatures suivantes : Common Clerk/greffiere communale 272 First Reading - Premiere lecture Second Reading - Deuxieme lecture Third Reading - Troisieme lecture 273 Minister bi i nistre }�\f� Tnnspnrtauon TfUnspons Ne", `t� Nouveau C A N A D A File 432 -105 March 14, 2006 Mr. '`form McFarlane, Mayor City of Saint John PO Box 1971, 15 Market Square Saint John NB E2L4LI Dear or McFarlane: I Jor)J/L. I am pleased to advise you that under our 2006 program for improvements to provincially designated highways in municipalities, my Department is prepared to assist your city in the estimated amount of $260,000 for all cost associated with the Department's shareable component for the following projects: 1) Route 100 (Rothesay Road) @ Drury Cove Road — Intersection Upgrading - $110,000 2) Route 100 (Rothesay Road) @ Kennebecasis Park Intersection — Storm Sewer & Left Turn Lane - 5150,000 I am further pleased to advise you that under our 2005 program, my Department will assist your city in the estimated amount of $30,000 for asphalt paving carried out by the City on Lancaster Street. An invoice from the City will be processed by the Department and a separate cheque will be forwarded to the City. In addition, under our 2006 Municipal Designated Highway Grant Program, my Department is prepared to assist your city in the estimated amount of $2,000,000 for all costs associated with the Department's shareable component for upgrading projects on Loch Lomond Road and Ocean Westway. Approximately $400,000 of the above mentioned $2,000,000 will be for work completed by the city on Loch Lomond Road in 2005, with the balance for new 2006 construction. T011,06phone : 11. 0. Box 6000 (506) 457.7345 Fredericton 171Ix/rca6copieur New Brunswick (506) 453.7987 Canada E•313 5I•11 274 Case posnde 6000 Fredericton Nouvenu•13nt115wiCk Canada E313 5111 Mr. Norm McFarlane, DZayor March 14, 2006 Page 2 It is noted that after the 2006 allotment, there will remain a balance of approximately $400,000 to complete the terms of the original Grant program agreement and the extension for Fairville Boulevard. On this basis, to complete the verbal agreement struck by Premier Lord and former Mayor McAlary that there be no remnant provincial highways, the Department will reclassify the following streets to municipal street staves effective January 1, 2007: 1) Route 100 (Ocean Westway) from Route 1 Interchange to Route 7 Interchange. 2) Route 100 (Manawagonish Road — Fairville Boulevard) from Gault Road to Catherwood Street. 3) Route 100 ( Rothesay Avenue) from Crown Street to Route 1. 4) Thorne Avenue and Loch Lomond road from Rothesay Avenue to Route 111. Department of Transportation Engineers will be in contact with your municipality in the near future to discus particulars regarding this work. Where projects are approved by the Department for tender by the municipality, the tender advertisements must identify provincial participation. The fiords are being provided with the understanding and agreement that the municipality must follow the spirit of the Crown Construction Contracts Act and Regulations, and that audits will be carried out by the Province from time to time. Sin , Paul Robichau Minister c.c. Hon. Trevor Holder Margaret -Arm Blaney, MLA Roly Maclntyre, MLA Dr. Ed Doherty, MLA Abel LeBlanc, MLA Stuart Jamieson, MLA Milt Sherwood, MLA Paul Groody, Commissioner of Municipal Operations Eric Griffin, P.Eng., City of Saint John Brian McEwing, Director of Planning & Land Management Clerk District Engineer 275 City Solicitors Office Bureau de Pavocat municipal The City of Saint John January 14, 2011 Common Council of The City of Saint John Your Worship and Councillors: Re: Traffic By -Law Amendment Duke Street West At its meeting on November 29, 2010, Common Council was made aware by the City Manager of the community's concerns about traffic on Duke Street West. As a result of the City Manager's report, M &C 2010 — 370, Council resolved to amend the Traffic By -Law by adding a portion of Duke Street West on Schedule B — No Parking Anytime; and also by adding a portion of Lancaster Street to Schedule D — One Way Streets. Pursuant to subsection 113(1) of the Motor Vehicle Act, R.S.N.B. 1973, c. M -17, and amendments thereto, a municipality may make by -laws for regulating the standing or parking or vehicles (section 113(1)(a)), and designating particular highways as one way highways and requiring that all vehicles thereon be moved in one specified direction (section 113(1)(d)). The attached amendment will result in adding the south side of Duke Street West, from Champlain Street to City Line, to Schedule B, thereby making said area a "no parking anytime" area. The amendment will also add Lancaster Street, from Duke Street West to Guilford Street in the southerly direction, to Schedule D, thereby making said area a "one way street ". Common Council may, if it so wishes, give first and second reading to the attached amendment. Respectfully Submitted, Vt Joh u nt Cit olicitor Attachment SAINT JOHN P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, NB Canada E2L 4L1 I www.saintjohn.ca I C.P. 1971 Saint John, N. -B. Canada E2L 41 276 BY -LAW NO.: A LAW TO AMEND A BY -LAW RESPECTING TRAFFIC ON STREETS IN THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN MADE UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF THE MOTOR VEHICLE ACT, 1973, AND AMENDMENTS THERETO ARRETE NO : ARRETE MODIFIANT L'ARRETE RELATIF A LA CIRCULATION DANS LES RUES DANS THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN EDICTS CONFORMEMENT A LA LOI SUR LES VEHICULES A MOTEUR (1973) ET LES MODIFICATIONS AFFERENTES Be it enacted by the Common Council of Lors d'une reunion du conseil municipal, The City of Saint John as follows: The City of Saint John a d6cr&6 ce qui suit : A By -law of The City of Saint John entitled "A By -law Respecting Traffic On Streets In The City of Saint John Made Under The Authority of The Motor Vehicle Act, 1973, and Amendments Thereto ", enacted on the 19`" day of December, A.D. 2005, is hereby amended as follows: 1 Schedule B — No Parking Anytime - is amended by adding the following words under the following headings : Street Side Limits Duke St. West South Champlain St. to City Line 2 Schedule D — One Way Streets - is amended by adding the following words under the following headings: Street Limits Direction Lancaster St. Duke St. Southerly West To Guilford St. Par les prdsentes, Parretd de The City of Saint John intituld « Arretd relatif a la circulation dans les rues dans The City of Saint John ddictd conformdment a la Loi sur les vehieules a moteur (1973) et les modifications affdrentes », ddcrdtd le 19 ddcembre 2005, est modifid comme suit: 1 L'Annexe B — Interdiction de stationner en tout temps — est modifide par Padjonction des mots suivants sous les titres suivants : Rues Cote Limites Rue Duke Sud De la rue Ouest Champlain a la City Line 2 L'Annexe D — Rues a sens unique — est modiBde par I'adjonction des mots suivants sous les titres suivants : 277 Rues Limites Direction Rue Lancaster De Ia rue Sud Duke Ouest a la rue Guilford IN WITNESS WHEREOF The City of Saint John has caused the Corporate Common Seal of the said City to be affixed to this by -law the day of , A.D. 2011 signed by: EN FOI DE QUOI, The City of Saint John a fait apposer son sceau municipal sur le present arrete le 2011, avec les signatures suivantes : Mayor /Maire Common Clerk/greffier communal First Reading - Premiere lecture Second Reading - Deuxieme lecture Third Reading - Troisieme lecture 278 REPORT TO COMMON COUNCIL M &C2011 -23 January 27, 2011 His Worship Mayor Ivan Court and Members of Common Council Your Worship and Members of Council: SUBJECT: Contract 2010 -27: Honeysuckle Drive — Relief Storm Sewer BACKGROUND 71r � I The City of Saint john The 2009 and 2010 General Fund Capital Programs - Storm category include funding for local drainage improvements for the Sherbrooke Street/Honeysuckle Drive area. This project consists generally of the supply of all necessary labour, materials and equipment for the installation of a new 525mm and 750mm storm sewer and outfall to provide relief capacity for the existing storm sewer on Honeysuckle Drive between Civic #49 and #81. TENDER RESULTS Tenders closed on January 26, 2011, with the following results: 1. Galbraith Construction Ltd., Saint John, NB 2. H.E. Merchant and Sons Ltd., St. George, NB 3. Terraex Inc., Saint John, NB 4. Debly Enterprises Limited, Saint John, NB 5. Dexter Construction Company Ltd., Bedford, NS 6. 614046 NB Ltd. (MIDI Construction), Saint John, NB 7. L. Halpin Excavating Limited, Saint John, NB 8. Brad Gould Trucking and Excavating Ltd., Nauwigewauk, NB 9. Gulf Operators Ltd., Saint John, NB 10. Fairville Construction Ltd., Saint John, NB 11. Maguire Excavating Ltd., Saint John, NB The Engineer's estimate for the work was $ 306,727.20 279 $ 264,250.50 $ 285,923.90 $ 288,336.45 $ 289,164.18 $ 292,260.26 $ 296,148.14 $ 296,300.66 $ 298,868.05 $ 302,708.92 $ 322,982.25 $ 420,693.35 M &C2011 -23 January 27, 2011 Page 2 ANALYSIS The tenders were reviewed by staff and all tenders were found to be formal in all respects. Staff is of the opinion that the low tenderer has the necessary resources and expertise to perform the work, and recommend acceptance of their tender. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The contract includes work that is charged against the 2009/2010 General Fund Capital Programs. Assuming award of the contract to the low tenderer, an analysis has been completed which includes work that will be performed by City forces and others. The analysis concludes that a total amount of $500,000.00 was provided in the budgets and that the projected completion cost of the project is estimated to be $363,813.55, including the City's eligible H.S.T. rebate — a $136,186.45 positive difference in the General Fund Capital Program. POLICY — TENDERING OF CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS The recommendation in the report is made in accordance with the provisions of Council's policy for the tendering of construction contracts, the City's General Specifications and the specific project specifications. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that Contract 2010 -27: Honeysuckle Drive — Relief Storm Sewer be awarded to the low tenderer, Galbraith Construction Ltd., at the tendered price of $264,250.50 as calculated based upon estimated quantities, and further that the Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to execute the necessary contract documents. Respectfully submitted, J. M. Paul Groody, P. Eng. Commissioner Municipal Operations & Engineering 280 J. Patrick Woods, CGA City Manager REPORT TO COMMON COUNCIL M &C2011 -20 January 24, 2011 His Worship Mayor Ivan Court and Members of Common Council Your Worship and Members of Council: 71r � I The City of Saint john SUBJECT: Contract 2008 -40: Kennebecasis Drive — Culvert Replacement and Street Reconstruction BACKGROUND The 2009 and 2010 General Fund Capital Programs - Storm category include funding for the renewal of an existing cross culvert on Kennebecasis Drive at Brother's Cove. The work consists generally of the supply of all necessary labour, materials and equipment for the excavation, installation and backfilling of twin 25 m long 1800 mm diameter culverts, cast - in -place headwalls, improvements to the grades of the roadway and other related work. TENDER RESULTS Tenders closed on January 12, 2011, with the following results: 1. Debly Enterprises Limited, Saint John, NB $ 508,602.77 2. Brad Gould Trucking & Excavating Ltd., Nauwigewauk, NB $ 525,272.76 3. Terraex Inc., Saint John, NB $ 546,262.51 4. Fairville Construction Ltd., Saint John, NB $ 552,258.29 5. Dexter Construction Company Ltd., Bedford, NS $ 594,739.27 6. Gulf Operators Ltd., Saint John, NB $ 610,779.30 7. H.E. Merchant and Sons Ltd., St. George, NB $ 696,823.71 8. Galbraith Construction Ltd., Saint John, NB $ 698,088.36 9. Spectrum Enterprises Inc., Saint John, NB $ 740,141.47 The Engineer's estimate for the work was $578,385.00 281 M &C2011 -20 January 24, 2011 Page 2 ANALYSIS The tenders were reviewed by staff and all tenders were found to be formal in all respects with the exception of the tenders submitted by H.E. Merchant and Sons Ltd. and Gulf Operators Ltd. which contained minor errors in mathematics. The math errors were corrected in accordance with Division 2 - Instructions to Tenderers and Tendering Procedures, Section 2.18 (a) and the corrected amounts are reported above. Staff is of the opinion that the low tenderer has the necessary resources and expertise to perform the work, and recommend acceptance of their tender. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The contract includes work that is charged against the 2009/2010 General Fund Capital Programs. Assuming award of the contract to the low tenderer, an analysis has been completed which includes work that will be performed by City forces and others. The analysis concludes that a total amount of $650,000.00 was provided in the budgets and that the projected completion cost of the project is estimated to be $538,743.96, including the City's eligible H.S.T. rebate — a $111,256.04 positive difference in the General Fund Capital Program. POLICY — TENDERING OF CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS The recommendation in the report is made in accordance with the provisions of Council's policy for the tendering of construction contracts, the City's General Specifications and the specific project specifications. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that Contract 2008 -40: Kennebecasis Drive — Culvert Replacement and Street Reconstruction be awarded to the low tenderer, Debly Enterprises Limited at the tendered price of $508,602.77 as calculated based upon estimated quantities, and further that the Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to execute the necessary contract documents. Respectfully submitted, J. M. Paul Groody, P. Eng. Commissioner Municipal Operations & Engineering 282 J. Patrick Woods, CGA City Manager 1 January 27, 2011 Deputy Mayor and Councillors Subject: Committee of the Whole Reporting to Council The Committee of the Whole, having met on January 24, 2011, adopted the following resolution: "RESOLVED that the Common Clerk be directed to place on the Open Session Common Council Agenda for the meeting of January 31 ", 2011, the Committee of the Whole ( "Committee ") recommendation that the City enter into the Agreement of Purchase and Sale, as submitted to the Committee at its meeting of January 24`h, 2011, for the purchase from Her Majesty the Queen ( "Canada "), as represented by the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans, of lands identified as Lot 2008 -1 and Lot 2008 -2 shown on a Subdivision Plan filed in the Saint John County Registry Office as Number 29301794; and further that the Common Clerk be directed to attach the said Agreement of Purchase and Sale as part of the Committee's recommendation." Sincerely, Ivan Court Mayor SAINT JOHN P.O. Sox 1 SM Saint John, N5 Canada E2L 40 I www. WntOhn.ca I C.P. 1971 Sairo# john, N. -B, Canada ESL 4L1 283 AGREEMENT OF PURCHASE AND SALE THIS AGREEMENT, made in triplicate this day of A.D., 2011 BETWEEN: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA ( "Her Majesty ") as represented by the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans (hereinafter referred to as "DFO ") OF THE FIRST PART AND: THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN, a body corporate by Royal Charter confirmed and amended by Acts of the Legislative Assembly of the Province of New Brunswick (hereinafter referred to as "CITY ") OF THE SECOND PART WHEREAS: I) The City intends to undertake a certain development in the vicinity of, and upon, two lots of land located within the City of Saint John, Saint John County, New Brunswick, owned by Her Majesty the Queen in right of Canada and described in Schedule "A" as Lot 2008 -1 and Lot 2008 -2 [collectively referred to herein as "the Lands "] and depicted on a Subdivision Plan entitled "H.M. in right of Canada" [and having internal Public Works and Government Services Canada number S- 5445 -1], dated June 10, 2010, approved by the Development Officer for the City of Saint John on the 24th day of September, 2010 and filed in the Registry Office for the County of Saint John as Plan number 29301794 on October 1, 2010 [ "the Plan"] attached hereto as Schedule "A -1 "; II) DFO has administration of Lot 2008 -1 and Lot 2008 -2 on the Plan; III) DFO is desirous of selling to the City and the City is desirous of purchasing from DFO Lot 2008 -1 and Lot 2008 -2 more particularly described in Schedule "A" to the City for a total purchase price of Two Million and Eight Hundred Thousand Dollars ($2,800,000) using a two phased approach, on the terms and conditions contained herein. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the mutual covenants and agreements hereinafter set out, and the payment of Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000.00) of the Purchase Price payable in lawful money of Canada, now paid by the City to DFO, the receipt and adequacy of which consideration as to each of the Parties hereto is hereby mutually admitted, the Parties respectively covenant and agree as follows. ARTICLE 1— DEFINITIONS AND INTERPRETATION 1.1. DEFINITIONS Where used in this Agreement the following terms shall have the following meanings respectively: Page 1 of 63 284 (a) "Agreement " - means this Agreement of Purchase and Sale, together with the Schedules attached hereto and all amendments, confirmations, extensions or renewals; (b) "Closing" - means the completion of the sale to and purchase by the City of the Lands contemplated hereunder by the transfer and delivery of documents of title and the payment of the purchase price therefore; (c) "Closing Date" - means a date to be fixed by written agreement of the Parties, I. for Phase 1, on or before March 31, 20111 and II. for Phase 2, on or before the latter of (A) June 30h, 2012 ; or, (B) 60 days after compliance with all conditions precedent identified herein as applicable to the Closing of Phase 2; or, (C) such other date as the Parties, acting reasonably, may agree in writing as the date on which the Closing shall take place; (d) "Down Payment"- means a deposit of Fifty Thousand ($50,000.00) Dollars of the Purchase Price to be paid to DFO on signing of this Agreement; (e) "Party " - means either DFO or the City as the context dictates; (f) "Parties " - means both DFO and the City referred to collectively; (g) "Purchase Price " - means the purchase price as defined in article 3.3. 1.2. GENDER AND NUMBER Words importing the singular include the plural and vice versa; words importing gender include all genders. 1.3. ENTIRE AGREEMENT This Agreement and all of the Schedules constitute the entire agreement between the Parties with respect to the purchase and sale of the Lands and this Agreement supersedes all prior agreements, understandings, negotiations and discussions, whether written or oral. There are no conditions, covenants, agreements, representations, warranties or other provisions, expressed or implied, collateral, statutory or otherwise, relating to the subject matter hereof except as herein provided. 1.4. HEADINGS The Article and Section headings contained herein are included solely for convenience of reference, are not intended to be full or accurate descriptions of the contents thereof and shall not be considered part of this Agreement. ARTICLE 2 —SCHEDULES 2.1. SCHEDULES The following are the Schedules attached to and incorporated in this Agreement by reference and deemed to be a part hereof: Schedule "A" Legal Description of Lot 2008 -1 and Lot 2008 -2; Schedule "A -1" The Plan Schedule `B" Environmental Disclosure Agreement Schedule "C" Licence of Occupation Page 2 of 63 285 ARTICLE 3 — AGREEMENT AND PURCHASE PRICE 3.1. AGREEMENT TO PURCHASE "AS IS, WHERE IS" Subject to the terms and conditions hereof, DFO agrees to sell, assign and transfer to the City and the City agrees to purchase from DFO, the Lands for the Purchase Price. 3.2. PHASE 1 AND PHASE 2 The Parties further agree that the Lands shall be sold in two phases with Phase 1 being the sale of Lot 2008 -1; and the Phase 2 being the sale of Lot 2008 -2. 3.3. PURCHASE PRICE AND ALLOCATION The Purchase Price payable by the City to DFO for: (a) Phase 1 shall be Eight hundred and thirty two thousand eight hundred and forty five Dollars ($832,845.00) plus applicable HST and any applicable adjustments; and for (b) Phase 2 shall be One million nine hundred and sixty seven thousand one hundred and fifty five Dollars ($1,967,155.00) plus applicable HST and any applicable adjustments. 3.4. ADJUSTMENTS (a) Pursuant to the Payment in Lieu of Taxes Act[ "PILT "] [R.S.C.1985,c.M -13] DFO shall pay all payments -in -lieu of taxes up to and including the Closing Date with respect to Lot 2008 -1 and Lot 2008 -2 respectively. Following the Closing Date, the City will be responsible for all applicable taxes, local improvement rates, water and assessment rates and all other taxes, assessments or levies of whatsoever kind; or (b) Any other taxes, local improvement rates, and any assessments levies or charges of whatever sort to which the Lands are subject shall be calculated and adjusted against the Purchase Price as of the Closing Date for each Lot; or (c) If for any reason the parties are required by law to allocate or apportion the purchase price or taxes, local improvement rates, water and assessment rates and any other taxes and impositions between any of the Lands, fixtures or other parts or portions of the Lands both parties, acting reasonably, shall agree as to the form and content of any and all such allocations or apportionments; (d) A statement of adjustments shall be delivered to DFO by the City at least three business days prior to the Closing Date and shall have annexed to it details of the calculations used by the City to arrive at all debits and credits on the statement of adjustments; (e) If the final cost or amount of an item which is to be adjusted has not been determined at Closing, then an initial adjustment for such item shall be made at Closing, such amount to be estimated by DFO acting reasonably, as of the Closing Date on the basis of the best evidence available at the Closing as to what the final cost or amount of such item will be. When such cost or amount is determined, including where such item was omitted from the Statement of Adjustments through inadvertence or otherwise, DFO or the City, as the case may be, shall within thirty days of determination, provide a statement thereof to the other and within thirty days thereafter the parties shall make a final adjustment as of the Closing Date for the item in question. DFO and the City agree to make a final adjustment as soon as reasonably possible but in any event prior to first anniversary of the Closing Date. In the absence of agreement by the parties, the final cost or amount of an item shall be determined by independent auditors appointed jointly by DFO and the City, with the cost of such auditors' determination being shared equally between DFO and the City. Page 3 of 63 286 3.5. TAXES, DUTIES AND OTHER CHARGES The City shall be liable for and shall pay all federal and provincial sales taxes and all other taxes, duties or other like charges properly payable upon and in connection with the conveyance of the Lands by DFO to the City. DFO and the City covenant and agree to execute jointly and file an election pursuant to Section 167 of the Excise Tax Act (Canada) in order that there is no tax payable by the City there under in respect of the transactions contemplated herein. ARTICLE 4 - TITLE 4.1. Title to the Lands (mines and minerals excepted) shall be good and marketable free from all encumbrances, except as to; (i) any municipal by -laws, Provincial or Federal regulatory or legislated enactments, (ii) registered rights -of -way, or (iii) other registered easements, (iv) registered restrictions or covenants that run with the Lands or such other encumbrances or reservations on, or exceptions to, title that do not negatively affect the marketability of the Lands and subject to any restrictions in the original grant from the Crown. 4.2. The City shall be allowed 60 days from the date of signing of this Agreement to investigate and examine the title to the Lands and if within that time the City makes any valid objection, in writing, to DFO, to the title to either Lot 2008 -1 or Lot 2008 -2 , which DFO, shall be unable or unwilling to remove and which the City, will not waive this Agreement and the obligations hereunder shall, notwithstanding any intermediate actions or negotiations in respect of subject objections and notwithstanding any rule of law or equity, be deemed null, void and of no force or effect and the City will be entitled to a return of its deposit but will have no further claim against DFO or Her Majesty for costs or damages of any kind and the voiding of the Agreement shall be without prejudice to any rights of DFO. 4.3. The City confirms and agrees that it has entered into this Agreement on the basis that, subject to its due diligence rights to, among other things, inspect the Lands, make its own determinations and opinions as to (a) the physical and environmental state or condition of the Lands; (b) the boundaries of the parcels and (c) the marketability of title to the Lands; and the City hereby specifically acknowledges and agrees that subject to paragraphs 4.1. and 4.2. the Lands are being purchased by it on an "as is, where is" basis as they shall exist on the respective Closing Dates including any latent or patent defect and that no representation, warranty or condition, whether statutory, express or implied, as to condition, merchantability, description, fitness for any particular purpose, suitability, durability, marketability of title, condition, quantity or quality thereof or in respect of any other matter or thing whatsoever concerning the Lands, save and except as expressly provided for in this Agreement. 4.4. DFO shall provide the City with all title and survey information within its possession or reasonably accessible by it. 4.5. (a) The City shall migrate the title to the Lands into the Land Titles Registry; (b) If the Lands are migrated to Land Titles prior to closing, the City shall ensure that its solicitors provide any applicable information to Justice Canada's solicitor prior to the filing of the PID databank application and prior to the swearing of the Form 2 affidavit, in support of the application for first registration as is necessary to fully inform DFO of the title issues applicable to the Lands. Page 4 of 63 287 ARTICLE 5 - INSURANCE 5.1. (a) The Lands and building are not insured against loss or damage but DFO shall continue to assume all risk associated with any loss by fire or other hazard up to and including the closing date subject to any loss or risks associated with or arising from access exercised by the City pursuant to clause 8. L(d) which access shall be at The City's own risk and subject to a release and indemnity from the City to DFO for all property damage and personal injury. (b) DFO assumes no liability to the City for any loss injury or damage it suffers arising from any loss or damage to the Lands and premises and the City shall be free to insure the premises against any such loss it may suffer. ARTICLE 6 - CONDITIONS PRECEDENT 6.1. The following are true conditions precedent to the conveyance or transfer of the Lands and cannot be waived by the City: (a) The City has accepted the title to, Lot 2008 -1 and Lot 2008 -2 in accordance with the terms and conditions herein; (b) The City has delivered to DFO a copy of a duly approved resolution of the City Council for the City, appropriately certified, authorizing the City to acquire the Lands on the terms and conditions contained herein; and ARTICLE 7 - PAYMENT OF PURCHASE PRICE AND TRANSFER AND DELIVERY THE LANDS 7.1. DOWN PAYMENT (a) On the signing of this Agreement, the City shall deliver to DFO a Down Payment as defined in Section 1.1 by way of a cheque payable to "The Receiver General for Canada " and the full amount of the Down Payment shall be credited against the purchase price on the Closing of Phase 1; (b) Subject to section 4.2., in the event that either Phase 1 or Phase 2 of this transaction is not completed for any reason whatsoever, the full amount of the Down Payment shall be forfeited to DFO and in such circumstances the City shall have no recourse whatsoever, whether at law or in equity, against DFO for any costs, expenses or damages, neither direct, indirect or consequential, suffered by the City by virtue of this transaction not having been completed. 7.2. PAYMENT OF PURCHASE PRICE On the Closing of each phase of the transaction the Purchase Price for that Phase, subject to adjustments, shall be paid and satisfied as follows: (a) On the closing of Phase 1 by crediting the full amount of the down payment to the Purchase Price and by delivering to DFO a cheque made payable to "The Receiver General for Canada" for the balance of the Purchase Price for Phase 1 subject to any adjustments calculated in accordance with the provisions of section 3.4 herein; and (b) On the closing of Phase 2 by delivering to DFO a cheque made payable to "The Receiver General for Canada" for the balance of the Purchase Price for Phase 2 subject to any adjustments calculated in accordance with the provisions of section 3.4. herein. Page 5 of 63 288 7.3. TRANSFER AND DELIVERY OF TITLE TO THE LANDS (a) At the Closing for Phase 1 and Phase 2, DFO shall deliver to the City: i) an Instrument of Grant issued pursuant to Section 5(7) of the Federal Real Property Act wherein Her Majesty shall grant, convey, bargain and sell unto the City all the right, title and interest, of Her Majesty in the Lot 2008 -1 and Lot 2008 -2 respectively excepting (A) any mines and minerals and (B) further saving and excepting in the Instrument of Grant conveying title to Lot 2008 -1 the sewer easement crossing Lot 2008 -1from east to west and identified on the Plan as "Sewer Easement to be reserved 5.0 wide" and an easement of access around the immediate perimeter of a utility building located on the north boundary of Lot 2008 -2 for purpose of accessing, maintaining and repairing a building; ii) vacant possession of the Lot being conveyed on that Closing unless altered by future lease or agreement of the Parties, free and clear of any liens; III. a conveyance or an assignment of any other rights or interests that DFO may have received by grant or conveyance or otherwise to allow for a full enjoyment as owner in fee simple of the Lands that are not otherwise included in the Instrument of Grant; and, IV. on the Closing of Lot 2008 -2 DFO shall include in the Instrument of Grant all remnant rights retained from the Instrument of Grant to Lot 2008 -1 pursuant to 7.3.(a)(i) above; (b) The City shall bear the fees, levies or taxes in connection with registration of all conveyancing documents; however DFO shall, at no charge, co- operate with the City in effecting such registrations, recordings and filings with public authorities as may be required in connection with the transfer of ownership to the City of the Lands; (c) The Closing for Phase 1 shall take place on the Closing Date as established in accordance with paragraph 1. L(c)(i) and in accordance with an agenda to be agreed upon between the parties. (d) The City agrees to accept possession of Lot 2008 -1 and Lot 2008 -2 in the condition it is in at the time of Closing and agrees to be bound by and comply in a timely manner with the provisions of the Environmental Disclosure Agreement entered into between DFO and the City, attached hereto as Schedule `B "; (e) On the Closing for each phase the City shall deliver to the DFO and attend to the registration on behalf of DFO immediately following the registration of the transfer to it, to rank as a first charge against the Lands, the option in favor of DFO referenced in Article 10; (f) On Closing, the City shall thereafter be liable for all (a) claims, actions, causes of action, expenses and costs, for losses, damage, injuries or death on Lot 2008 -1, resulting directly or indirectly from the ownership, occupation or use of Lot 2008 -1 by the City or those for whom the City is responsible; (b) all environmental liability caused by or otherwise the responsibility of the City except for any environmental liability specifically and expressed, acknowledged, and accepted by DFO pursuant to the environmental agreement attached as Schedule `B" (g) Notwithstanding the provisions of clause 4.2. no breach by DFO after the Closing Date for Phase 1 of any representation, term, condition or warranty under this agreement pertaining to Phase 1 or Phase 2 shall give the City the right to revisit, renege or reopen the transfer to Phase 1 and all such rights, legal, equitable or otherwise in favor of the City to do so shall merge with the transfer and title on the transfer of Phase 1. Page 6 of 63 289 (h) On closing the Parties shall provide to each other such further releases as are requested in writing and are reasonably necessary to give full effect to the intent and purpose of this Section 7 and the Agreement. ARTICLE 8 - REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES 8.1. REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES OF DFO (a) DFO makes no representations or warranties expressed or implied as to the condition of the Lands, or as to the suitability of all or any portion of the Lands for any purpose; (b) DFO is not required to hold any licence, permit or approval under any Environmental Laws except as disclosed in Schedule "B " hereto; (c) GST Registration - DFO shall be a registrant for GST pursuant to Part IX of the Excise Tax Act (Canada) prior to Closing and shall advise the City prior to Closing of its registration number; (d) Upon execution of this Agreement, DFO shall allow the City, its officers, servants, employees, agents, contractors, subcontractors and their workmen to have access onto, through and over the aforesaid Lot 2008 -1 and Lot 2008 -2, upon reasonable notice to DFO, at any time prior to the Closing, for the purposes of site investigation and preparation arising from this Agreement in accordance with the license of occupation contained in Schedule "C" attached hereto. 8.2. REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES OF THE CITY (a) The City represents and warrants that it has inspected the Lands or caused the Lands to be inspected on its behalf and to its full satisfaction and has entered into this Agreement in reliance upon such inspection and not in reliance upon any representation whether oral, written, or implied and by whosoever made; (b) GST Registration - DFO shall be a registrant for GST pursuant to Part IX of the Excise Tax Act (Canada) prior to Closing and shall advise the City prior to Closing of its registration number; (c) The City agrees that it will make reasonable efforts to relocate the lighthouse replica located on Lot 2008 -1 to an appropriate alternative location to be identified by DFO on Lot 2008 -2; and to do so with minimum damage or waste. (d) The City agrees and warrants that pending the closing of Phase 2 it shall continue to provide uninterrupted water and sewer services and such other easements and municipal services and access to Lot 2008 -2, and to DFO, its officers, servants, employees, agents, contractors, subcontractors and invitees so as to allow full use of Lot 2008 -2 as existed prior to the purchase of Lot 2008 -1; (e) The City warrants that it has full authority to enter into this agreement and shall provide such resolutions to DFO as may be necessary to confirm this authority. 8.3. NATURE AND SURVIVAL OF REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES (a) All statements contained in any certificate or other instrument delivered by or on behalf of a Party pursuant to or in connection with the transactions contemplated by this Agreement shall be deemed to have been made by such Party hereunder; (b) Unless clearly specified herein all representations, warranties, covenants and agreements herein contained on the part of each of the Parties shall survive the Closing to the extent necessary to give full effect to them and this Agreement. Page 7 of 63 290 ARTICLE 9 - DEFAULT BY CITY 9.1. If, through no fault of DFO, the City does not close the transaction or otherwise defaults on its obligation hereunder in respect to Phase 1 or Phase 2 on or before the Closing Date established for Phase 1, this Agreement shall be null and void and the City shall forfeit its deposit and all legal or equitable interest in Lot 2008 -1 or Lot 2008 -2 and these forfeitures shall be in addition to all other claims and remedies that DFO may have against the City for its failure to complete this Agreement and DFO shall not be liable for any costs or damages. 9.2. If, through no fault of DFO, after the closing for Lot 2008 -1, the City does not close the transaction or otherwise defaults on its obligation hereunder in respect to Lot 2008 -2 on or before the Closing Date established for Lot 2008 -2 in addition to any rights and remedies accruing to DFO under paragraph 4.2. the City shall forfeit its down payment and all legal or equitable interest in Lot 2008 -2 and these forfeitures shall be in addition to all other claims that DFO may have against the City for its failure to complete this Agreement and DFO shall not be liable for any costs or damages. ARTICLE 10 - OPTION TO BUY BACK (a) The City agrees to give back to DFO on closing of Phase 1 and Phase 2 respectively an option agreement in favor of DFO to be recorded immediately after the Instrument of Grant to the City against title to Lot 2008 -1 and Lot 2008 -2 respectively conferring on DFO an unencumbered and unrestricted option to buy back, at the sole discretion of DFO, Lot 2008 -1 and Lot 2008 -2 respectively, for a price that is the equivalent of and equal to the Purchase Price paid by the City to DFO, in the event that the City does not proceed with development of Lot 2008 -1 or Lot 2008 -2 within twenty (20) years of the Closing; and in that buy back option DFO shall give the City a sixty (60) day "notice of intention" to exercise its rights under the buy -back Agreement and; (b) This option shall terminate and be null and void upon the City entering into a development agreement with a developer to develop the Lands and this clause shall survive closing and DFO shall execute such other documentation as the City may require to give full effect to this clause 10(b). ARTICLE 11— NOTICES (a) Any notice or other communication required or permitted to be given hereunder shall be in writing and shall be delivered in person, transmitted by telecopy or similar means of recorded electronic communication or sent by registered mail, charges prepaid, addressed as follows: if to DFO: PERRY RIDEOUT Manager, Planning and Real Estate Services DEPARTMENT OF FISHERIES AND OCEANS Planning and Real Estate Services PO Box 1000 Dartmouth, Nova Scotia B2Y 3Z8 if to the CITY: The City Managers Office The City of Saint John PO Box 1971 Saint John, NB E21, 4L1 (b) Any such notice or other communication shall be deemed to have been given and received on the day on which it was delivered or transmitted (or, if such day is not a Business Day, on the next following Business Day) or, if mailed, on the fifth (50) Business Day following the date of mailing; provided, however, that if at the time of Page 8 of 63 291 mailing or within five (5) Business Days there after there is or occurs a labour dispute or other event that might reasonably be expected to disrupt the delivery of documents by mail, any notice or other communication hereunder shall be delivered or transmitted by means of recorded electronic communication as aforesaid; (c) Either party may at any time change its address for service from time to time by giving notice to the other party in accordance with this Article 11. ARTICLE 12 - COMMUNICATIONS 12.1. Subject to any written agreement to the contrary, the City and DFO each Party agrees that it shall keep confidential and shall not without prior consent of the other Parties disclose any information with respect to this Agreement or the purchase and sale contemplated hereby, provided that a Party may disclose any such information (i) as has become generally available to the public other than as a result of a disclosure by the Party, (ii) to the extent necessary in order to comply with any law, order, regulation, or ruling or any requests from a governmental or regulatory body applicable to such party, or (iii) to its professional advisors (who shall to the same extent be bound by this provision). 12.2. Prior to any public announcement of the transaction, neither Party shall disclose this Agreement or any aspects of such transaction except to its board of directors, its senior management, its legal, accounting, financial or other professional advisors, any financial institution contacted by it with respect to any financing required in connection with such transaction and counsel to such institution, or as may be required by any applicable law or any regulatory authority. 12.3. The Parties shall consult with each other before issuing any press release or making any other public announcement with respect to this Agreement; the transactions contemplated hereby and, except as required by any applicable law or regulatory requirement, neither of them shall issue any such press release or make any such public announcement without the prior written consent of the other, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. ARTICLE 13 - MISCELLANEOUS 13.1. No member of the House of Commons shall be admitted to any share or part of this Agreement or to any benefit to arise therefrom. 13.2. Words importing the singular number may include the plural, and words denoting the masculine gender may include the feminine, if the context so required. 13.3. Time in all respects shall be of the essence of this Agreement and all the provisions hereof. 13.4. This Agreement shall be binding upon the City hereto and its respective heirs, executors, administrators and permitted assigns. 13.5. The City shall not assign this Agreement in whole or in part without the prior written consent of DFO. 13.6. This agreement shall be construed in accordance with the laws of the Province of New Brunswick. Page 9 of 63 292 IN WITNESS WHEREOF this Agreement has been executed on behalf of HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA, as represented by the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans or the officer duly authorized by HER the day and year first above written, and the City has caused its corporate seal to be hereunto affixed, duly attested to by the hands of its proper officers on its behalf this day of , A.D., 2011. SIGNED, SEALED AND DELIVERED in the presence of HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA, as represented by the Minister of Public Works and Government Services Canada on behalf of the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans Witness (Please Print) Per: Title SIGNED, SEALED AND DELIVERED in the presence of THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN Per: Mayor ) And: ) Per: Common Clerk ) Common Council ) Resolution: 1 293 Signature Signature Page 10 of 63 SCHEDULE "A" TO AN AGREEMENT OF PURCHASE AND SALE BETWEEN CANADA AS REPRESENTED BY THE MINISTER OF FISHERIES AND OCEANS AND THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN, DATED THE DAY OF , 2011. ALL THOSE CERTAIN lands and premises situate lying and being in the City of Saint John and in the County of Saint John in the Province of New Brunswick more particularly described as follows: LOT 2008 -1 BEING Lot 2008 -1 on a Subdivision Plan entitled "H.M. in right of Canada" [and having internal Public Works and Government Services Canada number S- 5445 -1], dated June 10, 2010, approved by the Development Officer for the City of Saint John on the 24th day of September, 2010 and filed in the Registry Office for the County of Saint John as Plan number 29301794 on October 1, 2010 LOT 2008 -2 BEING Lot 2008 -2 on a Subdivision Plan entitled "H.M. in right of Canada" [and having internal Public Works and Government Services Canada number S- 5445 -1], dated June 10, 2010, approved by the Development Officer for the City of Saint John on the 24th day of September, 2010 and filed in the Registry Office for the County of Saint John as Plan number 29301794 on October 1, 2010 Page 11 of 63 294 SCHEDULE "A-1" TO AN AGREEMENT OF PURCHASE AND SALE BETWEEN CANADA AS REPRESENTED BY THE MINISTER OF FISHERIES AND OCEANS AND THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN, DATED THE DAY OF 2011. rf '0 r m 4 i '0011' 1. *9 4 Vl\ Kit kmi W c'08* t. i, p F45-51 Fi ptzo �-W-i 1LIM3 M" 0 LW 4 I N Ig= MaX X.1 22F :Rlul =� 15Z !M.12 Om ir. M& 2W2 mein -W 01 !WMA A= Z.: ;r,= ;x im" 6x R xrA in !v.W Sil !Awn ;v An'; Mm ' I' cii-- m N 1014 3:1 miu iC !�als •A uly 'AM V ;W.'a ME �Xlv ME 3!5 1 A lz*,.x UNP ft, 'Anp DO % T. IrkK 10 pivii in ri. so 7 IM11% W ISMT 7r.w ; p2ra '30,94 Igo WM A" a 01. a Pin uz., Q h1.1.14"—WT.---16—.Fa"'-Pi' 0 1 7 'A W. In VON, S-5445 nift ap a WW'M "'Ill 1, r Kk EV SECTOR, M. Li i# of Con* (DeWmW 0 F�kk ond ken) BoR aROI W. N it; ke mm W ww lotef shd , C4 4 sw .4 n" 3 11 N9. P, 7 rf '0 r m 4 i '0011' 1. *9 4 Vl\ Kit kmi W c'08* t. i, p F45-51 Fi ptzo �-W-i 1LIM3 M" 0 LW 4 I N Ig= MaX X.1 22F :Rlul =� 15Z !M.12 Om ir. M& 2W2 mein -W 01 !WMA A= Z.: ;r,= ;x im" 6x R xrA in !v.W Sil !Awn ;v An'; Mm ' I' cii-- m N 1014 3:1 miu iC !�als •A uly 'AM V ;W.'a ME �Xlv ME 3!5 1 A lz*,.x UNP ft, 'Anp DO % T. IrkK 10 pivii in ri. so 7 IM11% W ISMT 7r.w ; p2ra '30,94 Igo WM A" a Page 12 of 63 295 01. a Pin uz., Q h1.1.14"—WT.---16—.Fa"'-Pi' 1 7 'A W. S-5445 nift ap a WW'M "'Ill 1, r Kk EV SECTOR, M. Li i# of Con* (DeWmW 0 F�kk ond ken) BoR aROI W. N it; ke mm W ww lotef shd , C4 4 sw n" 3 11 P, 7 M 3 ' 111101F061 AA WkW WJM71- Z/.' r L N -7- .'961 84.160 Page 12 of 63 295 SCHEDULE "B" TO AN AGREEMENT OF PURCHASE AND SALE BETWEEN CANADA AS REPRESENTED BY THE MINISTER OF FISHERIES AND OCEANS AND THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN, DATED THE DAY OF , 2011. MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT (ENVIRONMENTAL DISCLOSURE) THIS AGREEMENT, made in triplicate this day of A.D., 2011. BETWEEN: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA ( "Her Majesty ") as represented by the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans (hereinafter referred to as "DFO ") OF THE FIRST PART AND: THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN, a body corporate by Royal Charter confirmed and amended by Acts of the Legislative Assembly of the Province of New Brunswick (hereinafter referred to as "CITY ") OF THE SECOND PART WHEREAS: I) The City intends to undertake certain development in the vicinity of, and upon, two lots of land located within the City of Saint John, Saint John County, New Brunswick owned by Her Majesty the Queen in right of Canada and described in Schedule "A" as Lot 2008 -1 and Lot 2008 -2 [collectively referred to herein as "the Lands "] and depicted on a Subdivision Plan entitled "H.M. in right of Canada" [and having internal Public Works and Government Services Canada number S- 5445 -1], dated June 10,2010, approved by the Development Officer for the City of Saint John on the 24th day of September, 2010 and filed in the Registry Office for the County of Saint John as Plan number 29301794 on October 1, 2010 [ "the Plan"] attached hereto as Schedule "A -1 "; II) DFO has administration of Lot 2008 -1 and Lot 2008 -2 on the Plan III) DFO is desirous of selling to the City and the City is desirous of purchasing from DFO Lot 2008 -1 and Lot 2008 -2 more particularly described in Schedule "A" to the City for a total purchase price of Two Million and Eight Hundred Thousand Dollars ($2,800,000) using a two phased approach, on the terms and conditions contained herein. IV) An environmental site assessment of Lot 2008 -1 and Lot 2008 -2 has been completed; V) The City agrees to purchase Lot 2008 -1 and Lot 2008 -2 "as is" in its existing condition; VI) DFO agrees to ensure that Lot 2008 -1 and Lot 2008 -2 is to be sold or disposed of in a state compatible with all applicable Federal laws or regulations relating to the environment. Page 13 of 63 296 NOW THEREFORE this Agreement witnesseth and the parties hereto and each of them covenant and agree, the one with the other, as follows: 1.1. DEFINITIONS (a) "Applicable federal laws and legislation" shall mean Federal environmental legislation, regulations, binding orders or rulings of Federal government agencies, and any other applicable Federal laws in force at the time of this Agreement; (b) "Environmental Contaminant" shall mean any physical, chemical, biological or radiological substance having an adverse effect on the environment, which has been released into the environment and whose concentration exceeds the greater of naturally occurring background levels or applicable regulations or guidelines; (c) "Reports" shall mean: i) Air Quality Assessment, Buoy Paint Shed, Coast Guard, Saint John, NB, prepared by Washburn & Gillis Associates Ltd., March 31, 1995; ii) Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment, Coast Guard Facility, CCG Sector ID SN8090, Peter's Wharf, Saint John, New Brunswick, prepared by Jacques Whitford Environment Limited, June 18, 2001; iii) Hazardous Materials Survey, Saint John Coast Guard Base, CCG Sector ID SN 8090, Peter's Wharf, Saint John, New Brunswick, prepared by Jacques Whitford Environment Limited, June 18, 2001; iv) Final Phase II Environmental Site Assessment, Saint John Coast Guard Base, LDU/PN #03920, RPIS #MD00309, CCG Sector ID SN8090, Saint John, New Brunswick, prepared by Jacques Whitford Environment Limited, March 25, 2002; v) PCB Lamp Ballast Identification Project, Saint John Coast Guard Base, Saint John, Saint John County, New Brunswick, RPIS #MD00309, LDU /PN #03920, CCG Sector ID #SN8090, prepared by SNC - Lavalin, May 2003; and, vi) Inventory of Mercury Containing Products, Saint John Coast Guard Base, Saint John, Saint John County, New Brunswick, RPIS #MD00309, LDU /PN #03920, CCG Sector ID #SN8090, prepared by SNC - Lavalin, June 2003. (a) "This document" shall mean this Memorandum of Agreement (Environmental Disclosure). (b) "Environment" as in the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, means the components of the earth and includes: (a) air, land and water; (b) all layers of the atmosphere; (c) all organic and inorganic matter and living organisms; and (d) the interacting natural systems that include components referred to in paragraph (a) and (c). 2.1. GENERAL (a) There are to the knowledge of DFO no orders or directions in relation to environmental matters requiring any work, repairs, construction or capital expenditures with respect to Lot 2008 -1 and Lot 2008 -2 and the use thereof, nor has DFO received any Notice thereof, except as may be disclosed in this document; (b) DFO warrants that, to the best of its knowledge, no Environmental Contaminants, have been released into the environment, or deposited, discharged, placed or disposed of at, on or in Lot 2008 -1 and Lot 2008 -2, except as disclosed in this document; Page 14 of 63 297 (c) DFO and the City warrant that they have been provided with and are aware of the contents of the Reports. A summary of the environmental reports follows: i) Air Quality Assessment, Buoy Paint Shed, March 31, 1995: The air quality investigation was completed during scraping and painting operations in the Buoy Shed. Recommendations for employee safety included a suggested protocol for paint removal and that to ensure that employees are wearing proper personal protective equipment (PPE) during corrosion/paint removal and painting activities; ii) Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment, June 18, 2001: The Phase 1 ESA identified potential site contamination in the areas of former underground storage tanks (USTs), two in -ground oil -water (O/W) separators, a fuel spoil from a truck filling equipment in 1972, metals from former maintenance of buoys in the dock yard, asbestos - containing materials (ACM) in buildings, and potential lead -based and mercury-based paint on interior and exterior of site buildings. Phase II ESA follow -up was recommended; iii) Hazardous Materials Survey, June 18, 2001: Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB) containing light ballasts were identified in Shops Buildings, Administration Building, Marine Emergency and Helicopter Hangar, and Buoy Shed. ACM was identified in the Administration Building (as grey corrugated straight pipe insulation and in plaster walls and ceilings (encapsulated with drywall) and likely within enclosed solid ceiling or wall systems, pipe chases), Buoy Shed (vinyl sheet flooring, also likely within inaccessible areas) and may also be present in the Shops Building and Marine Emergency and Helicopter Hangar within inaccessible areas. Lead -based paint was identified on the exterior of the Shops Building (black paint on garage doors and trim); Buoy Shed (black paint on garage doors, single doors and trim); and in the dockyard (white paint on exterior of tourist lighthouse located near northwestern corner of site). Mercury concentrations in paint ranged from 0.03 to 130 pm; iv) Final Phase II Environmental Site Assessment, March 25, 2002: The Phase II ESA intrusive investigation identified zinc in soil exceeding the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (COME) commercial guidelines at one location (north end of Shops Building) and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in soil exceeding the CCME commercial guidelines of the day at one location (adjacent to west side of Marine Emergency and Helicopter Hangar, in the area of the O/W separator). One PAH parameter (benzo(a)pyrene) in groundwater exceeded the CCME drinking water quality guidelines and the freshwater aquatic life (FAL) guideline however; the site is non - potable (i.e. supplied with municipal drinking water) and the FAL guideline is applicable only to a watercourse. PAHs in soil at two locations exceed the current (2008) CCME Commercial (Human Health, Direct Contact). Insufficient surface soil PAH testing was completed in order to confirm that PAH concentrations in surface soil are within current guidelines, however, if asphalt cover extends across the site, there is no human contact pathway and no suspected human health concerns. The zinc concentrations identified in 2002 also exceed the CCME 2007 (update) guideline however are well within the DFO Soil Screening Criteria (SSC) for residential or residential /parkland exposure. It is noted that the CCME zinc guideline is based on ecological receptors. There is no CCME human health guideline for zinc and no zinc concentrations measured on the site would be considered a risk to human health. The petroleum hydrocarbon concentrations in soil and groundwater were all within the Atlantic Risk -Based Corrective (RBCA) 2003 Tier I Risk -Based Page 15 of 63 298 Screening Levels (RBSLs) for a commercial receptor with non - potable water and coarse - grained soil. Tables from the Phase II ESA have been updated with current guidelines and Figure 3 from the Phase II ESA showing impact areas on the site are attached as Schedule "B"; v) PCB Lamp Ballast Identification Project, May 2003: A selection of accessible lamp ballasts was inspected in the on -site buildings. Lamp ballasts that contained PCBs were identified with the Administration Shops, Marine Emergency and the Buoy Shed buildings. Not all lamp ballasts were inspected due to safety restrictions. vi) Inventory of Mercury Containing Products, June 2003: Approximately 74.0 grams of mercury was identified in thermostats in the Shops building and Buoy Shed, float switches in the Shops building and in various alkaline batteries present on -site. 3.1. OBLIGATIONS OF THE CITY AND DFO (a) The City and DFO agree that the disposition of Lot 2008 -1 and Lot 2008 -2 may proceed without any further environmental site assessment or site remediation being undertaken by either Party; (b) The City agrees to accept Lot 2008 -1 and Lot 2008 -2 in their present environmental state as of the date of this Agreement without recourse against DFO; (c) The City acknowledges that it is aware that there are hazardous materials associated with various on -site buildings. The City should put in place management plans to administer lead -based paint, ACM, PCB containing lamp ballasts, and mercury- containing products; (d) The City acknowledges that it is aware that environmental conditions at the site include soil impacts of zinc at one location and PAH's at one location; (e) The City is responsible to review the reports and determine if further environmental site assessment or site remediation is warranted for any new use proposed for Lot 2008 -1 and Lot 2008 -2; (f) The City agrees to abide by and follow the mitigative measures contained in the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA) Screening Report dated March 16th, 2010 attached hereto as Schedule `B" to this Memorandum of Agreement (Environmental Disclosure); (g) The City has read and understood the "Canadian Environmental Assessment Screening Report" dated March 16th, 2010 and acknowledges that mitigative measures contained therein are included in this Environmental Disclosure Agreement as Schedule "B" and further acknowledges that DFO reserves the right to design and implement `accuracy and compliance monitoring', to ensure compliance by the City with the mitigative measures. 4.1. LIABILITY (a) DFO shall be liable for all losses, costs, claims, demands, expenses, proceedings and actions of every nature and kind for injury or damages, including indirect, consequential and incidental damages, which are or may be in any way related to, or connected or associated with environmental contamination of the Lands which was unknown to both parties at the time of signing this agreement and which was caused directly or indirectly Page 16 of 63 299 from the ownership, occupation or use of the Lands by Her Majesty, her agents, employees, or representatives. (b) Subject to paragraph (a), the City and DFO agree that the conveyance of the Lands shall proceed without any further environmental site assessment or site remediation being undertaken by either party. (c) Subject to paragraph (a), the City agrees to accept the environmental liability related to the Lands or the environmental conditions of the Lands which were known by both parties at the time of signing this agreement, as set out in the Reports. Any remedial action of the Lands required as a result of the environmental contamination known at the time of signing the agreement, shall be the sole responsibility of the City on closing. (d) Should the City propose alternative uses for the Lands, it shall be responsible to review the Reports and determine if further site assessment or site remediation is warranted for the proposed uses. (e) Subject to paragraph (a), the City hereby releases DFO and Her Majesty, their agents and employees, from all claims, demands, actions or causes of action that the City ever had or may hereafter have as a result of the purchase of the Lands. 5.1. MISCELLANEOUS (a) The representations and warranties contained herein shall not merge but shall survive the transfer or conveyance of Lot 2008 -1 and Lot 2008 -2 to the City. The doctrine of merger shall not apply hereto and this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect notwithstanding the sealing, issuing or delivery of the conveyancing document; (b) The Parties shall not be in default or liable for any loss or damages resulting from delays in performance or from failure to perform or comply with the terms of this Agreement due to any causes beyond their reasonable control, including without limitation, acts of God or public enemy, riots, insurrections, war, accidents, fire, strikes, and labour difficulties, embargoes, or judicial orders; (c) Any and all notices or other information to be given by one of the Parties to another shall be deemed sufficiently given when forwarded by prepaid registered or certified first class mail, or by facsimile transmission or hand delivery to one or both of the Parties at the following address: If to DFO: PERRY RIDEOUT Manager, Planning and Real Estate Services DEPARTMENT OF FISHERIES AND OCEANS Planning and Real Estate Services PO Box 1000 Dartmouth, Nova Scotia B2Y 3Z8 If to the City: The City Manager's Office The City of Saint John P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, New Brunswick E21, 4L1 (d) This agreement shall not be assigned or transferred by either Party without consent of the other, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld; (e) The failure of any of the Parties to give notice to the other Party of a breach or non- fulfillment of any term, clause, provision or condition of this agreement, shall not constitute a wavier thereof, nor shall the waiver of any breach or non - fulfillment of any Page 17 of 63 300 term, clause, provision or condition of this agreement constitute a waiver of any breach or non - fulfillment of any term, clause, provision or condition of this agreement; (f) No member of the House of Commons shall be admitted to any share or part of this Agreement or any benefit arising therefrom. IN WITNESS WHEREOF this Agreement has been executed on behalf of HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA, as represented by the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans or the officer of the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans duly authorized by her the day and year first above written, and the City have caused its corporate seal to be hereunto affixed, duly attested to by the hands of its proper officers on its behalf this day of , A.D. 2011. SIGNED, SEALED AND DELIVERED in the presence of HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA As represented by the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans Witness (Please Print) Per: Title SIGNED, SEALED AND DELIVERED in the presence of THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN Per: ) Mayor ) And: ) Per: Common Clerk ) Common Council ) Resolution: 1 301 Signature Signature Page 18 of 63 SCHEDULE "A" TO THIS ENVIRONMENTAL MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN CANADA AS REPRESENTED BY THE MINISTER OF FISHERIES AND OCEANS AND THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN, DATED THE DAY OF 92011. ALL THOSE CERTAIN lands and premises situate lying and being in the City of Saint John and in the County of Saint John in the Province of New Brunswick more particularly described as follows: LOT 2008 -1 BEING Lot 2008 -1 on a Subdivision Plan entitled "H.M. in right of Canada" [and having internal Public Works and Government Services Canada number S- 5445 -1], dated June 10, 2010, approved by the Development Officer for the City of Saint John on the 24th day of September, 2010 and filed in the Registry Office for the County of Saint John as Plan number 29301794 on October 1, 2010 LOT 2008 -2 BEING Lot 2008 -2 on a Subdivision Plan entitled "H.M. in right of Canada" [and having internal Public Works and Government Services Canada number S- 5445 -1], dated June 10, 2010, approved by the Development Officer for the City of Saint John on the 24th day of September, 2010 and filed in the Registry Office for the County of Saint John as Plan number 29301794 on October 1, 2010 Page 19 of 63 302 SCHEDULE "A -1" TO THIS ENVIRONMENTAL MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN CANADA AS REPRESENTED BY THE MINISTER OF FISHERIES AND OCEANS AND THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN, DATED THE DAY OF .2011. / df✓° .I! ad / - Yfd�c� VO 1 j.� Sldl h:l ZIP'>' I yN':. ' 13XN llWenh Wkna.i6,NIB j ut R r #. Q. VANXm XiN m�yer 4d rs « f9 . }P ° I. I Xm,wfa N•auq Xre klpYl nYek I/ fiXm•4,i •J 4w:pw�.Y!if aP ` •. _ _.9 -:y nee y.m•'.exq� I 111 I 1 6mweN.^.q:mlr+m.. r.r. y ,r l/ ' . 111 w �� -, YNNw Yvouxgrhdn^.dmq 1 a -• 1 6 d8`f,�l I.j, Idl4__ P, ur amdimsem.+. ,yam, L .m „J r., j r!Y i •�,m!� _ ast�' r!<SY I ! ndwN p�Y:u n►v.unkn ''. • ;�V ,id° .l 4,f4 «kYtl•SW Y4,.1 N:. YyX�•l ;� y I � 1 R�dIM YGWKaiIMVhf” \I 'j I 14 Ia w+Mw3rtkh d PrA.! -I, Y !_ I 1 r• a�,LLNR ea.s Gm bk4 WT4 �Jemx! ree«mr,r,t•Ykt n�dN lr. Wl YX�� i F b /.f«augi:]ia^Id 0 / _ ! 1 1 � bpa.4XM p1NPY,Mdtww � Igtfa:hN Tew Mnl tfaeb 1 % _Y: Y[•f MhiYgM I vI IZI I'T.n14 •�1'j '.I i T n..a t- rn+n„x4.aad.4.x I. f i I ; I x�.�rse�f Nfq k'm LLekr/ �' �t m' ( yam' / 't C_.... -..• ti. t 0. I 1 1VNfY�yl ',(� yy Cifa• ntl rn. er f'j�?�7! �� '�p1• ;o-.r iLti1' la Fr�rl4id fo-OdXk Iths' 't j n � ! fY roi a•IX!s R Ld 2008 -2 4 •Q S+CIM tS NW - R IWMR 0t1 c° q n 1p\ ✓e' �j t f ' n -MR iaZ'wly IvICW v i�:i! '- •RY. ucKd Way r '..f; ! ! ^.f X1n1 IX;!:f!fl m ! _ .�ry.•r•. ^,h plc '/ I. ' ;.! n no Ixrls m �\ a :i•) f IM I'm •m!CC '. 4'J �l�j / 11'nA seal n.'KX11x E1 Im1^>'3 R h ' i -Y an t•x �.Xkls y, .:', a Xam men •.� YM�S4r1. VI -OINm 111 x LM T1lr+ ;I mm 4m .0.i.'' c >rmtl laev 4m 3xtriC(a.A41 qYY N AL113 imNL41 RCS A031 lod, 4:N . x 0m% IXli 41P C Y aY mnl m dl mv 4117 HOME r.. sms tMTE y� Im!lw 4(C J l nl vrso Im1Xf !fl vaq Amm imOK'q mw A dX gx�ms:Im!a r, Rn eYdwr,dn,mNK4'mrsn.k wgwlNmN1 k W dbNf, X 4m« mb 4z aX')4'4m Ym4M.NNd %�1 -IDOti BfO W.tllJ Wh4Pmv \� 4m � a� }I'K Yf b,IpaM 1'Y MhFRnatn ixNr.awer tm Y44u rw..hrem• h aamd'ms'. N,YGnq!Kfp Y4Xgr1 '1r4 �'aW RO: Odd— NeXIX'a W N K'0, Btr • nllswtsnw lXS(Xf d[a CmXP ^JIIIlnXXSX.'m'.:m -Y 61 iRSlBp M1LXWfgp N xTX,7oN llamSlfsN IMIX!fi -!Qla !P10LC al x(7PLXnl 0.1eilf GN !sm 1'XI I n :fsl N(a t� 1xm•r® I PH lypja:..wl XlPmlf lfm :NT ID ti Inli L'lX 1 a(f XSgM RaePrf PAY mm 3t x f.9IXIf: '$ f xfems. luvfuu 'aa sl N n1I,'re m xsm POaf - Im Ifs Iralf!%�,4 0 A�gaW mum.; 0.XXYS7101 :N: m 7 �mIX!a m n =1 `1110.1L mN6a al lasl>♦em:a we x ' nn(slf a! r "Or -ur. lIX ®SIP` I� x I n let /0110 ml ! 9z1bP! RkYS a 16 wsffm 'm a - :: la'slz = NgCKNPa mi a I e YItlIID � < !hS{1[4Pa X IPXfPPAI f101 R C •s!lslk 1 COC Yf!9q P pl.anx sleIYPGNF Pit 9 d 'ht /II!' �' aXX R fia m7A pl'..1gM d5 nlAmf PfsSl jNp 9 v tlP l:; /X sdx 4. 1'' • 4 303 Page 20 of 63 j m Ipl .- P,IMIi $a�x :YrLY / NNI� nli1A a I/ y, dt• qs'r Tbl b..warlem., ` � � 1 Hw T'ebk Nq NArifmlft N�✓ ,X. I lnN K'v,4M wpkkYN 1 S. •� / '� 1 •m19 7. • % f P � q nI FZL 1 %r78 1 -� -, g mum � !.hum -5 �� 9 AX 8 •.\ til dm !s ,r Fm as'.+ � � SUb6SI011 Poll .tr- ' >smm aYP.I � "wd �nLL / ' S ' IL W. m right al CaOadan \ rz I{1F!X x v, • .`nfST !9 a `/ " , axal d Wim OM Dow) 1 '/ 1 • 99 S�bdYlaOn , Sa6 An OW Gard Base . \\ /'T11 ddoYe ir° ' CICf S* Gly al sw An, \ / s , dNp 'N + y T / -,r i6Q�14 � '/'�'��1Prry� ��rrjj,, __`` pg€� } ! l (w PiifW4 bk � 303 Page 20 of 63 SCHEDULE "B" TO THIS ENVIRONMENTAL MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN CANADA AS REPRESENTED BY THE MINISTER OF FISHERIES AND OCEANS AND THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN, DATED THE DAY OF , 2011. Disposal and Redevelopment of a Portion of the Canadian Coast Guard Base Saint John Development Corporation Saint John, Saint John County, New Brunswick PWGSC Project No. R. 720000.141 Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA) Screening Report Prepared by Public Works and Government Services Canada — Environmental Services Halifax, NS for Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) March 16, 2010 Page 21 of 63 304 Canadian Environmental Assessment Act - .4creeniao Rannrl TABLE OF CONTENTS SCREENINGSUMMARY ............................................................................... ............................... 1 PART A: PROJECT INFORMATION ............................................................. ............................... 1 PART B: ESTABLISHMENT of RESPONSIBILITY ..................................... ............................... 1 PART C: SCOPE OF PROJECT ( S. 15) ................. ............................... PART D: SCOPE OF ASSESSMENT (S. 16) ................................................... ............................... PARTE: CONSULTATIONS ........................................................................ ............................... 16 PARTF: COMMENTS ................................................................................... ............................... 17 PART G: FOLLOW-UP (S.38) .............................. ......................... 18 ................ ............................... PARTH: DETERMINATION .......................................................................... .............................19 SCREENING CERTIFICATE... REFERENCES .......................... LIST OF TABLES ... ............................... 20 ... ............................... 21 Table 1 Potential Project / Environment Interactions Matrix Table 2 Assessment Criteria for Determination of Significance Tables 3.1 — 3.6 Potential Project / Valued Ecosystem Interactions and Mitigation Table 4.0 Potential Effect of the Environment on the Project Table 5.0 Cumulative Effects Appendix B Record of Public Participation Determination Appendix C Canadian Environmental Assessment Registry — Notice of Commencement Disposal and Redevelopment of a Portion of the Canadian Coast Guard Base: Saint John, Saint John County, New Brunswick PWGSC Project No. R.720000.141— March 16, 2010 Page 22 of 63 305 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A Figures Figure No. l Topographic map (21G/08) indicating project site Figure No.2 Street Map of Proposed Site Figure No.3 Site Overview Figure No.4 Phase 1 Overview Figure No.5 Phase 2 Overview Figure No.6 Phase 3 Overview Figure No.7 Phase 4 Overview Figure No. 8 Aerial View of Downtown Saint John with Marked Property Boundaries Figure No.9 Aerial View of Project Site with Marked Property Boundaries Appendix B Record of Public Participation Determination Appendix C Canadian Environmental Assessment Registry — Notice of Commencement Disposal and Redevelopment of a Portion of the Canadian Coast Guard Base: Saint John, Saint John County, New Brunswick PWGSC Project No. R.720000.141— March 16, 2010 Page 22 of 63 305 Q_n_gdian Environmental Acc m Act Screenin¢ Reoort SCREENING SUMMARY The Saint John Waterfront Development Corporation, on behalf of the City of Saint John, intends to purchase and redevelop the Canadian Coast Guard base in Saint John, New Brunswick. Fisheries and Oceans Canada (the current landowner disposing of land) has examined the potential project environmental interactions and has determined, pursuant to the CEA Act, that, taking into account the implementation of proposed mitigation measures and compliance with applicable regulatory requirements, the proposed project is not likely to result in significant adverse environmental effects. PART A: PROJECT INFORMATION Responsible Authority: Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) Responsible Officer. Perry Rideout – Manager, Planning and Real Estate Services (DFO) Project Title: Disposal and Redevelopment of portion of Canadian Coast Guard Base Proponent: Saint John Development Corporation Location: Saint John, New Brunswick DFO Contact person: Perry Rideout, (902) 426 -6223 PWGSC Assessor: Troy Young, (902) 496 -5062 CEAR Reference Number: 10 -01 -52223 PWGSC Project Number: R.720000.141 PART B: ESTABLISHMENT of RESPONSIBILITY X at least one activity/component does not appear in the Exclusion Last Regulations. and, (one or more of the following applies) X the Activity relates to a physical work, the Activity appears in the Inclusion List Regulations; and, (one or more of the following applies) — the Federal Authority is the Project Proponent (S.5. (1)(a)); the Federal Authority provides Financial Assistance to the project (S.5.(1)(b)); X the Federal Authority leases, sells or disposes of Federal Land for the purpose of enabling the project (S.5. (1) (c)); or the Federal Authority will exercise a regulatory duty for the purpose of enabling the project, such as issue a permit or license that is included in the Law List Regulations (S.5. (1) (d)). Disposal and Redevelopment of a Portion of the Canadian Coast Guard Base: Saint John, Saint John County, New Brunswick PWGSC Project No. R.720000.141 — March 16, 2010 Page 23 of 63 306 fanadian Environmental Acceccss3ent Act Screening Ren rt PART C: SCOPE OF PROJECT (S.15) Background The proposed project involves the disposal of federal land to enable a project, and therefore requires the completion of a screening level environmental assessment under the Canadian Environment Assessment Act (CEAA). The proposed site is located at the former Canadian Coast Guard Base in Saint John, Saint John County, New Brunswick. Refer to Figure No. 1 in Appendix A for topographic map (21G/08) for location of the proposed site. The site is a 2.43ha site located along Water Street, legally described by Service New Brunswick as PID No. 00011569. The property owner is Fisheries and Oceans Canada. The Saint John Development Corporation, on behalf of the City of Saint John, is acquiring the DFO -owned parcel in order to redevelop the property. Construction Proiect Description The proposed project is a 4-phase redevelopment of waterfront property being disposed of by Fisheries and Oceans Canada. There is the potential for contact with contaminated soil as noted in the Jacques Whitford Environment Limited Phase 2 Environmental Site Assessment (ESA), dated March 25, 2002. Any contaminated soil encountered must be remediated or disposed of in a provincially approved manner. Phase I Phase one (1) is composed of five (5) sub - phases. Phase IA involves the renovation of two existing buildings with footprints measuring 1,394m2 and 1,800m' to accommodate the establishment of a consolidated coast guard and commercial/institutional building. Phase 113 involves the development of a 130 room hotelwith a footprint measuring 2,434m2. The building will have ground floor commercial space and underground parking which will require excavation. Phase 1C involves the development of 36 -40 unit residential tower with a footprint measuring 800m2. Phase 1D involves the construction of an underground interior link to market square and will require excavation. Phase I involves the extension of the street grid. Phase one (1) has a 6-36 month timeframe for completion. Refer to Figure No. 4 in Appendix A for a diagram. Phase 2 Phase two (2) is composed of four (4) sub - phases. Phase 2A and 2B involve the development of a 10,219m2 commercial/educational building and 40 -60 unit residential building at Walker's Wharf respectively. Phase 2C involves the development of a 260 stall parking facility with a footprint measuring 2,296m2. Phase 2D will involve the renovation of loyalist plaza with potential sub -grade parking (120 spaces). This phase has a 3 -5 year timeframe for completion. Refer to )Figure No. 5 in Appendix A for a diagram. Phase 3 Phase three (3) is composed of two (2) sub - phases. It involves the development of a 20 unit crescent shaped residential building with a footprint measuring 2,764m2 (3A) and the development of &12 residential units at Princess Slip with a footprint measuring 1,152m2 (3B). This phase has a 5-10 year timeframe for completion. Refer to Figure No. 6 in Appendix A for a diagram. Phase 4 Phase four (4) is composed of two (2) sub - phases. It involves the development of a 48 unit residential complex with a footprint measuring 810m2 (4A) and 1,301m2 retail building on Water Street (4B). This phase has a 5 -10 Disposal and Redevelopment of a Portion of the Canadian Coast Guard Base: Saint John, Saint John County, New Brunswick PWGSC Project No. R.720000.141— March 16, 2010 Page 24 of 63 307 Canadian Environmental Ace ment Act Screening Ren rt year timeframe for completion. Refer to Figure No. 7 in Appendix A for a diagram. Operation Upon completion, the proposed project will enhance the image of uptown Saint John through the establishment of residential, educational, and commercial infrastructure. Decommissionin Currently there are no plans for decommissioning or abandoning the proposed project. However, the site could be restored to its present state or developed for alternative use by employing conventional demolition and restorative techniques with appropriate mitigation where applicable. Regulatory The Contractor will be required to submit a Health and Safety Plan, and an Environmental Protection Plan prior to commencement of work. Submission of these plans will not relieve the Contractor of responsibility for compliance with applicable environmental regulations. Applicable environmental legislation includes, but is not limited to, the following: • Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME), Environmental Quality Guidelines; • Environment Canada, Section 36(3) of the Fisheries Act, prohibits the planned or accidental discharge of deleterious substances to waters frequented by fish; Scheduling The proposed project will begin once the land disposal process is complete and has a 5.10 year anticipated timeline for completion. PART D: SCOPE OF ASSESSMENT (S.16 Environmental Settin The proposed project site is located in the city of Saint John (450 16'1 8"N, 66 °03'49 "W), in the Fundy Coast eco-region of New Brunswick. The proposed project site measures approximately 2.43ha in area and is located along Water Street, PID #00011569. Refer to Figures No. 2, 8, and 9 in Appendix A. Historically, the site was a commercial area for shipping that consisted of old wooden wharves and sheds. During construction of the Coast Guard Base in 1961, the old wharves were in- filled and the new dock facility was created. The current site provides space for parking and is highly developed. No vegetation removal, or work in the water will be required. Conestoga- Rovers & Associates (CRA) was commissioned by PWGSC, on behalf of DFO, to prepare a summary letter regarding the environmental conditions at PID #00011569. Through a Phase 1 & 2 ESA performed by Jacques Whitford Environment Limited in June, 2001 and March, 2002 respectively, it was determined that soil impacts from zinc (Zn) and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) were present at two separate locations. Several other documents were reviewed and revealed hazardous materials were associated with several on -site buildings. Lead -based paint, asbestos - containing materials (ACM), polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB) containing lamp ballasts, and mercury- containing products were all present at the site. These hazardous materials were reportedly maintained in good condition and should be administered with management plans. Physical Environment The bedrock is composed of Proterozoic, Palaeozoic, and Mesozoic strata rising from sea level to about 215 m asl inland. The terrain is highly variable, ranging from the rolling to steep, deeply incised highlands to undulating plains. Discontinuous, stony glacial till blankets the highlands, whereas loamy tills, sandy Disposal and Redevelopment of a Portion of the Canadian Coast Guard Base.• Saint John, Saint John County, New Brunswick PWGSC Project No. R.720000.141— March 16, 2010 Page 25 of 63 308 Canadian Environmentd ssesc_ment Act - Screening Report fluvioglacial sediments, and silty marine deposits occupy lowlands. Humo - Ferric Podzols are the dominant soil. Mesisols on flat bogs occur in lowland areas. Regosols and Gleysols on diked and drained salt marshes are used for agriculture. The Canadian Climate Noimals (1971 to 2000) recorded from the climate station in Saint John (45 019' N 65 053' W), New Brunswick indicate an annual daily mean temperature of 5.0'C, with extremes ranging from — 36.7°C to 34.tC. Measurable precipitation averages 1390.3 mm annually. Extreme daily precipitation has been recorded at 154.4 mm. Biological Environment The Fundy Coast eco-region is predominantly coniferous forest composed of red spruce, balsam fir, and red maple with scattered white spruce, and white and yellow birch. Sugar maple and beech are found at higher elevations. The region provides habitat for moose, black bear, white - tailed deer, red fox, snowshoe hare, porcupine, fisher, coyote, beaver, ruffed grouse, bobcat, and raccoon. Salt marshes and tidal flats provide important habitat for migratory shorebirds. Approximately 10% of the eco-region is farmland. Forestry, the fishery, tourism, and seashore recreation are other land uses. Species at Risk A search of the Atlantic Canada Conservation Data Centre (ACCDC) database was conducted within a 5 km radius of the proposed project location (ACCDC 2009). The search yielded 108 species of concern with documented sightings within the search area; 18 of these species have an S 1 designation, four species of moss, the Pussy Toes (Antennaria howellii ssp. petaloidea), the Russet Sedge (Carex saxatilis), a Liverwort (Cephaloziella divaricata ), the Strawberry Goosefoot (Chenopodium capitatum), the Broom Crowberry (Corema conradii), the Button-Bush Dodder (Cuscuta cephalanthi), the Leatherback Turtle (Dermochelys coriacea), the Bottlebrush Grass (Elymus hystrix var. bigeloviana), the Willow Flycatcher (Empidonax traillii), the American Peregrine Falcon (Falco peregrinus anatum), the Silver- haired Bat (Lasionycteris noctivagans), the Wilson's Phalarope (Phalaropus tricolor), the Pointed Blue Eyed Grass (Sisyrinchium angustifolium), and the House Wren (Troglodytes aedon). However, given the current developed state of the proposed project site and the lack of suitable habitat in the area it is not likely that the site provides critical or limiting habitat for these species and does not contain any environmental components that are considered to be important, sensitive, threatened or endangered that are likely to be affected by the project. No SARA (Species at Risk Act) Schedule 1 species were found as a result of the ACCDC database search. However, as noted in the ACCDC species search, the project site is located within the distribution range of the Monarch Butterfly, the American Peregrine Falcon, and the Harbour Porpoise — Northwest Atlantic Population, placed in the Special Concern category; the Least Bittern placed in the Threatened category; and the Piping Plover, Leatherback Turtle, and Red Crossbill, placed in the Endangered category, by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Animals in Canada (COSEWIC). However, given the developed nature of the project site and the lack of suitable habitat it is unlikely that these species would inhabit or visit this site According to the ACCDC, there are four Special Areas within a 5 km radius of the proposed project location. They are: • Rockwood Park; • Red Head Marsh; • Dominion Park; and • Carleton Martello Tower National Historic Site. Disposal and Redevelopment of a Portion of the Canadian Coast Guard Base: Saint John, Saint John County, New Brunswick PWGSC Project No. R. 720000.141— March 16, 2010 Page 26 of 63 309 Methodology The environmental assessment methodology used in this screening report focuses the assessment on those environmental components of greatest concern. The Valued Ecological Components (VECs) most likely to be affected by the project as described are indicated in Table 1. VECs were selected based on ecological importance to the existing environment (above), the relative sensitivity of environmental components to project influences and their relative social, cultural or economic importance. The potential impacts resulting from these interactions are described below. SC plJlP This environmental assessment considers the full range of project / environment interactions and the environmental factors that could be affected by the project as defined above and the significance of related impacts with mitigation. The considered interactions include land, air, and water resources, and cumulative effects of the project, in relation to other existing or anticipated projects. Malfunction and accidental events are included. For the purpose of this screening the spatial bounds of the project have been limited to the project site and the immediate surrounding area. The temporal bounds include the full life cycle of the project including construction, operation, decommissioning and abandonment. Disposal and Redevelopment of a Portion of the Canadian Coast Guard Base: Saint John, Saint John County, New Brunswick PWGSC Project No. 8.720000.141— March 16, 2010 Page 27 of 63 310 ' [' / /t Potential Project / Environment interactions Matrix Disposal and Redevelopment of a Portion of the Canadian Coast Guard Base: Saint John, Saint John County, New Brunswick Potential Effect of Project on Environment: ?=Not enouizh lnfnrmatenn: ' - ' = Nn Interart;nn D' posal and Redevelopment of a Portion of the Canadian Coast Guard Base: Saint John, Saint John County, New Brunswick P GSC Project No. R 720000.141 - March 16, 2070 311 `'• `a o0 fi a h fi i h Q y s a � Z e 01c h 3z h Z U C � 1z ect s/ 0! c 01 o o a tea p a `e or o N a Physical Work/Activity o f�L Q0 , tO fi Z 4\ Q4 o o CJ � - � fi •� w w C Oi � Cl o i Construction/Deconstruction Excavation - - P P P - - - P - - - - - - P P - Building Construction /Renovation - - P P P _ _ _ P _ _ _ _ _ _ p p _ Underground Link to Market Square Construction - - P p p - - _ p _ _ _ _ _ _ p p _ Operation / Maintenance _ Decommissioning / Abandonment - t-Lp Accidents / Malfunctions / Unplanned Ev - P _ _ _ p _ _ _ _ _ _ _ p _ D' posal and Redevelopment of a Portion of the Canadian Coast Guard Base: Saint John, Saint John County, New Brunswick P GSC Project No. R 720000.141 - March 16, 2070 311 Effects Assessment The selected VECs are addressed in Tables 3.1 through 3.6 below. The residual effects of the project on the environment are defined. Similarly, the physical works / activities and required mitigation are detailed, and the significance of residual (post mitigation) effects are estimated. The following ratings are based on information provided by the proponent. • A review of project related activities; • An appraisal of the environmental setting, and identification of resources at risk; • The identification of potential impacts within the temporal and spatial bounds; and • Own personal knowledge and professional judgement. The significance of project related impacts were determined in consideration of their frequency, the duration and geographical extent of the effects, and magnitude relative to natural or background levels, and whether the effects are reversible or are positive or negative in nature. These criteria are indicated in Table 2. Table 2. Assessment Criteria for Determination of Significance. Disposal and Redevelopment of a Portion of the Canadian Coast Guard Base: Saint John, Saint John County, New Brunswick PWGSC Project No. R. 720000.141 - March 16, 2010 Page 29 of 63 312 Magnitude, in general terms, may vary among Issues, but is a factor that accounts for size, intensity, concentration, importance, volume and social or monetary value. It is rated as compared with background conditions, protective standards or normal variability. Magnitude Small Relative to natural or background leve h Moderate Relative to natural or background ]eve k Large Relative to natural or background love is Reversible Effect can be reversed Reversibility Irreversible Effects are permanent Immediate Confined to project site Geographic Extent Local Effects beyond immediate project site but not regional in scale Regional Effects on a wide scale Short Term Between 0 and 6 months in duration Duration Medium Tern Between 6 months and 2 years Long Term Beyond 2 years Once Occurs only once Frequency Intermittent Occurs occasionally at irregular intervals Continuous Occurs on a regular basis and regular intervals Disposal and Redevelopment of a Portion of the Canadian Coast Guard Base: Saint John, Saint John County, New Brunswick PWGSC Project No. R. 720000.141 - March 16, 2010 Page 29 of 63 312 ro w w e 0 a, w Canadian Environmental Assessment Act - Screening Rennrt Table 3.1-3.6: Potential Project/ Valued Ecosystem Interactions and Mitigation (S 16(1)) Table 3.1 Valued Ecosystem Component — Marine Water Qualify Potential Effect: Marine water contamination. Potential Interaction 11Titigation Impacts to marine water quality from heavy - Work must be scheduled to avoid periods of heavy precipitation. Erosion control structures (temporary matting, equipment use (disturbed soil from construction geotextile filter fabric) are to be used, as appropriate, to prevent erosion and release of sediments and/or activities). sediment laden water during the construction please. These structures are to be left in place until vegetation is re- established and /or all exposed soils are stabilized. Refueling vehicles and construction machinery on site. • Machinery must be checked for leakage of lubricants or fuel and must be in good working order. Refueling must be done at least 30 m from any water body and on an impermeable surface. Basic petroleum spill clean-up Contamination of marine water due to hazardous equipment must be on -site. All spills or leaks must be promptly contained, cleaners up and reported to the 24- material spill. hour environmental emergencies reporting system (1- 800 - 565 - 1633). • Fuel levels in equipment and / or on -site fuel storage tanks must be inspected on a daily basis to ensure there is no leakage to the surrounding environment. Refer to Part F. Mitigation for more information. Magnitude Reversibility Geographic Extent Duration Frequency Moderate Reversible Local Medium -Term Intermittent Residual Effects: insignificant Monitoring / Follow -up: None required Comments: Construction activities could result in the mobilization of on site soils, especially during precipitation events. Such runoff events are likely to be of short duration and confined to the project site. The potential exists for the contamination of local surface water reserves from hydrocarbons due to upsets during refueling of construction equipment. Such effects can be avoided through the application of effective mitigation measures. Disposal and Redevelopment of a Portion of the Canadian Coast Guard Base: Saint Jahn, Saint John Count},, Neu, Brunswick P!1 GSC Project No. R. 720000.141 — March 16, 2010 313 b c� w 0 �-n o. w Canadian Environmental Asses Went Act Screening Report Table 31 Vaned Ecosystem Component -Fish /Fish Habitat Potential Effect: Harmful alteration, destruction or disruption of fish /fish habitat. Potential Interaction Mitigation Project activities may result in debris/material • All waste materials must be disposed of in a provincially approved manner so as to mitigate potential effects entering the marine environment. generated by leachate entering the adjacent marine waters. Contamination of surface water due to hazardous • If any construction debris/material, (e.g ", plastic, food scraps, etc.) enter the marine environment they must be material spill. removed immediately and disposed in a provincially approved manner. • Machinery must be checked for leakage of lubricants or fuel and must be in good working order. Refueling must be done at least 30 m from any water body and on an impermeable surface. Basic petroleum spill clean -up equipment must be on -site. All spills or leaks must be promptly contained, cleaned up and reported to the 24 hour environmental emergencies reporting system (1- 800 - 565 - 1633). . Fuel levels in equipment and / or on -site fuel storage tanks must be inspected on a daily basis to ensure there is no leakage to the surrounding environment. Refer to Part F. Mitigation for more information. Magnitude Reversibility Geographic Extent Duration Frequency Small Reversible Immediate Medium -Term Intermittent Residual Effects: Insignificant Monitoring / FoIlow -up: None required Comments: The potential exists for the contamination of adjacent marine waters from hydrocarbons due to upsets during refueling of construction equipment. In addition, waste material generated during construction activities has the to impact potential negatively adjacent marine waters and fish/fish habitat for the medium- term. Such effects can be avoided through the application of effective mitigation measures. Disposal and Redevelopment of a Portion of the Canadian Coast Guard Base: Saint John, Saint John County, Neer Brunswick PWGSC Project No. R 720000.141 — March 16, 2010 314 b 04 co w N 0 �n a w Can Environmental Assessment Act - Screening Report Table 33 Valued Ecosystem Component— s its Potential Effect: Erosion and contamination of soils. Potential Interaction Mitigation Disturbance to soil from heavy equipment use. • Work must be scheduled to avoid periods of heavy precipitation. Erosion control structures (temporary matting, geotextile filter fabric) are to be used, as appropriate, to prevent erosion and release of sediments and/or Contamination of the soil. sediment laden water during the construction phase. These structures are to be left in place until vegetation is re- established and/or all exposed soils are stabilized. Contamination of soil due to hazardous material spill. • The exposed soil area must be minimized by limiting the area that is exposed at one time and by limiting the time that any one area is exposed. All stockpiled soil must be covered and/or dyked to prevent erosion and release of sediment laden water. Wherever possible, exposed soil is to be replanted or sodded to ensure soil stabilization. All waste materials must be disposed of according to provincial Waste Management Regulations. Contaminated soil that is in excess must be stored on site for the shortest time possible, covered, and be disposed of at an approved facility. • All contaminated soil remaining in place on site must be capped with clean fill, asphalt or concrete paving to ensure there is no access to contaminated soil, or otherwise remediated to CCME standards. • Machinery must be checked for leakage of lubricants or fuel and must be in good working order. Refueling must be done at least 30 in from any water body and on an impermeable surface. Basic petroleum spill clean-up equipment must be on -site. All spills or leaks must be promptly contained, cleaned up and reported to the 24- hour environmental emergencies reporting system (1- 800 - 565 - 1633). • Fuel levels in equipment and / or on -site fuel storage tanks must be inspected on a daily basis to ensure there is no leakage to the surrounding environment. • Refer to Part F, Mi tigation for more info rma ' Magnitude Reversibility Geo hic Extent 11mmediate IDuration Freauency Small :]Intermittent Revemible -term Residual E ects: Insignificant Monitoring / Follow -up: Comments: Construction activities could result in the mobilization of on site soils, especially during precipitation events. Such runoff events are likely to be of short duration and confined to flie. DrQiectsite The. implementntinn ofeffeefive. mitigation rneagure- can reduce guch effectq tn insi"ifirant level-. Disposal and Redevelopment of a Portion of the Canadian Coast Guard Base: Saint John, Saint John County, Neu, Bruttswick PWGSC Project No. P, 720000-141 — March 16. 2010 315 b w ao co w w 0 �-n o. w Table 3.4 Valued Ecosystem Component -Air Quality/Noise Potential Effect: Increase in noise, emissions and dusting. Potential Interaction Mitigation Use of heavy machinery may cause short-term elevated noise levels and emissions at the site, _ All construction equipment must be fitted with standard and well - maintained noise suppression devices. Construction activities must respect appropriate time restrictions and along the transportation route, and may affect area use smaller, less disturbing equipment where possible. residents and businesses. Construction activities may cause increase in dust • Appropriate dust suppression methods must be employed when required. The construction manager shall determine locations where water is to be applied, the amount of water material. to be applied, and the times at which it shall be applied. Waste oil is not to be used for dust control under any circumstances. Short-term exposure to contaminated air quality as Engines must not be allowed to idle between work periods. a result of hazardous materials spills or equipment malfunctions. Refer to Part F: Mitigation for more information. Magnitude Reversibility Geographic Extent Duration Frequency Small eversi a Immediate Short-term ttcnt Intermi Residual Effects: Insignificant Monitoring / Follow-WP None require Comments: Construction related activities could result in an increase in noise and dust on the project site and surrounding area. Dusting conditions related to machinery use will be of short duration. While negative in nature, such effects are generally avoidable with appropriate mitigation measures. Similarly, any increase in noise levels related to the operation of construction equipment will be of short duration. The magnitude of such noise effects will be small, taking appropriate mitigative measures into account. Disposal and Redevelopment of a Portion of the Canadian Coast Guard Base: Saint John, Saint John County, Neiv Brunswick PWGSC Project No. R_720000.141 —March 16, 2010 KBI 10 to uo CD w A O "h W Table 3.5 Valued Ecosystem Component - Land Usc Potential Effect: Change in property coning, Potential Interaction Mitigation Property re- zoning may be required for operation of ' Property must be appropriately re-zoned by the City of Saint John before project proceeds. the site. Refer to Part F: Mitigation for more information. Magnituae iceversiuuity GL_.I -phic Extent Duration Frequency 1K.v:sible Sh ,_rt term Once Small Immeiiate Residual Effects; insignificant Monitoring / Follow-up: None required Comments: Successful municipal re- zoning of this property for commercial / residential use is required to enable the proposed project to proceed. Disposal and Redevelopment of a Portion of the Canadian Coast Guard Base: Saint John, Saint John County, New Brunswick PWGSC Projecl No_ R.720000.141 —March 16, 2010 317 10 P3 as w cn 0 �-n es, w Table 3.6 Valued Ecosystem Component - Human Health Potential Effect: HU111o11 exho411r0 to Nuzurds. Potential Interaction Mitigation Persons present on or surrounding project site may • Workers who may come in contact with hazards must be provided with and use appropriate personal protective be exposed to hazards. equipment. Short -term exposure to hazardous materials as a Site access must be restricted to authorized workers only. result of spills or equipment malfunctions. Dust suppression measures must be applied to prevent fugitive dust. Refer to Part F: Mitigation for more information. Magnitude Reversibility Geographic Extent Duration Frequency Small Reversible Immediate Short-term int —irt —t Residual Effects: insignificant Monitoring / Fok ,up: None required Comments: While workers may be exposed to hazards, the exposure can be limited through the use of appropriate personal protective equipment and restricting site access to authorized workers only. In addition, workers must follow the Provincial Occupational Health and Safety Act and any other appropriate legislation, regulations, guidelines, or best-management practices. Disposal and Redevelopment of a Portion of the Canadian Coast Guard Base: Saint John, Saint John County, New Brunswick PWGSC Project No. R. 720000.141 — Morch 16, 2010 318 b vc w o, 0 �•n a w Canadian Environmental A escment Act - Screening Rennrf Table 4. Potential Effect of the Environment on the Project Potential Effect: The climate (i.e. wind, ice, flood, etc.) could have an immediate negative impact on the project. Potential Interaction Mitigation Permanent damage and/or loss of equipment. Weather conditions must be assessed on a daily basis to determine the potential risk of climate on the project. The Contractor is encouraged to consult Environment Canada's local forecast at http : / /www.weatheroffice.ec.gc.ca/ so that the construction work can be scheduled at appropriate times. • The proponent is to ensure that the climate or potential sea level rise in the area is (where relevant) considered in the design of the infrastructure components. • Refer to Part F: Mitigation for more information. Magnitude Reversibility Geographic Extent Duration Frequency Small Reversible Immediate Short-term Intermittent Residual Effects: Insignificant Monitoring / Follow -up: None required Comments: While infrequent, severe weather conditions may effect the project operations. With appropriate planning and implementation of effective mitigation measures, such negative impacts can be avoided. Disposal and Redevelopment of a Portion of the Canadian Coast Guard Base: Saint John, Saint John County, New Brunswick PWGSC Project No, R.720000.141 — March 16, 2010 - 319 10 in tro w J 0 �-n o. w Canadian Environmental As essment Act - creeni" Report Table 5. Cumulative Effects Potential Effect: Past, present and likely future project activities resulting in cumulative effects. Other Projects / Activities Potential Cumulative Interaction Mitigation Other past, present, and likely • Contamination of surface • Proper safety procedures must be followed for the duration of the project as per applicable future projects and activities soil/water due to solid waste municipal, provincial and federal regulations. considered in cumulative effects disposal. assessment, such as: • Degradation of water quality Mitigation for potential effects in Tables 3.1 to 3.6, inclusive, constitutes sufficient from hazardous materials mitigation to deal with any potential cumulative effects. • Solid Waste Disposal; • Accidental events /spills (i.e. • Further Site Development; chemicals, fuel, hydraulic fluid , Any and all stipulations of federal, provincial, or municipal authorities or their officers and and lubricants). must be strictly followed. As a best practice the most stringent standards are to be used *Maintenance Projects; where applicable. Any discrepancies must be successfully resolved before the pertinent work may begin. Refer to Part F1 Mitigation for more information. Significance of Cumulative Effects: Insignificant Monitoring / Follow-up: None required Comments: The construction project under assessment is not projected to have cumulative effects considering past and potential future projects. There are no other predicted effects that may result from the proposed construction activities. Wl'th appropriate planning and implementation of effective mitigation measures, any negative impacts can be avoided. Disposal and Redevelopment of a Portion of the Canadian Coast Guard Base: Saint John, Saint John County, New Brunswick PWGSC Project No. R. 720000.141 _ March 16, 2010 320 Canadian Environmental Assessment Act - Screening Report PART E: CONSULTATIONS Public Consultation The potential for public concern is minimal due to the positive public reception during public hearings held by the City of Saint John. Public consultation was not deemed necessary as part of this screening. A record of public participation determination is found in Appendix B. The public was given the opportunity to review and comment on this project through the regulated posting of a Notice of Commencement on the Canadian Environmental Assessment Registry (CEAR) website. The Notice of Commencement was posted on Janury 5, 2010 (CEAR #10 -01- 52223). A copy of the Notice of Commencement is included in Appendix C. As required, the Notice of Commencement for this EA was available on the Canadian Environmental Assessment Registry for a minimum of 15 days prior to the EA decision. Government Consultation Public Works and Government Services Canada — Environmental Services Other Responsible Authorities None identified. Disposal and Redevelopment of a Portion of the Canadian Coast Guard Base: Saint John, Saint John County, New Brunswick PWGSC Project No. R. 720000.141— March 16, 2010 Page 38 of 63 321 Canadian Environmental Assec went Act Screening Report PART F: COMMENTS Impacts Potential impacts of this project are associated with construction disturbances. It is reasonable to conclude that with appropriate mitigation in place and good work practices, impact will be of short duration and the potential zone of influence will be confined to the immediate vicinity if the work. Mitigation • The proponent must ensure that a copy of these "Environmental Requirements" will be readily available on site for inspection and reference purposes during the construction phase of the project, and that all contractors and their agents will be made aware of and respect the following requirements where applicable to their direct involvement in the work. • Any and all stipulations of federal, provincial, or municipal authorities and/or their officers must be strictly followed. As a best practice the most stringent standards are to be used where applicable. Any discrepancies must be successfully resolved before the pertinent work may begin. • Work must be scheduled to avoid periods of heavy precipitation. Erosion control structures (temporary matting, geotextile filter fabric) are to be used, as appropriate, to prevent erosion and release of sediments and/or sediment laden water during the construction phase. These structures are to be left in place until vegetation is re- established and/or all exposed soils are stabilized. • Machinery must be checked for leakage of lubricants or fuel and must be in good working order. Refueling must be done at least 30 m from any water body and on an impermeable surface. Basic petroleum spill clean -up equipment must be on -site. All spills or leaks must be promptly contained, cleaned up and reported to the 24 -hour environmental emergencies reporting system (1- 800 - 565 - 1633). • Fuel levels in equipment and / or on -site fuel storage tanks must be inspected on a daily basis to ensure there is no leakage to the surrounding environment. • All waste materials must be disposed of in a provincially approved manner so as to .mitigate potential effects generated by leachate entering the adjacent marine waters. • Contaminated soil that is in excess must be stored on site for the shortest time possible, covered, and be disposed of at an approved facility. • All contaminated soil remaining in place on site must be capped with clean fill, asphalt or concrete paving to ensure there is no access to contaminated soil, or otherwise remediated to CCME standards. • If any construction debris /material, (e.g., plastic, food scraps, etc.) enter the marine environment they must be removed immediately and disposed in a provincially approved manner. • The exposed soil area must be minimized by limiting the area that is exposed at one time and by limiting the time that any one area is exposed. All stockpiled soil must be covered and/or dyked to prevent erosion and release of sediment laden water. Wherever possible, exposed soil is to be replanted or sodded to ensure soil stabilization. • All waste materials must be disposed of according to provincial Waste Management Regulations. Disposal and Redevelopment of a Portion of the Canadian Coast Guard Base: Saint John, Saint John County, New Brunswick PWGSC Project No. R. 720000.141— March 16, 2010 Page 39 of 63 322 Canadian Environmental Asses ment Act Screening Report • All construction equipment must be fitted with standard and well - maintained noise suppression devices. Construction activities must respect appropriate time restrictions and use smaller, less disturbing equipment where possible. • Appropriate dust suppression methods must be employed when required. The construction manager shall determine locations where water is to be applied, the amount of water to be applied, and the times at which it shall be applied. Waste oil is not to be used for dust control under any circumstances. • Engines must not be allowed to idle between work periods. • Property must be appropriately re -zoned by the City of Saint John before project proceeds. • Workers who may come in contact with hazards must be provided with and use appropriate personal protective equipment. • Site access must be restricted to authorized workers only. • Dust suppression measures must be applied to prevent fugitive dust. • Weather conditions must be assessed on a daily basis to determine the potential risk of climate on the project. • The Contractor is encouraged to consult Environment Canada's local forecast at http : / /www.weatheroffice.ec.gc.ca/ so that the construction work can be scheduled at appropriate times. • The proponent is to ensure that the climate or potential sea level rise in the area is (where relevant) considered in the design of the infrastructure components. • Proper safety procedures must be followed for the duration of the project as per applicable municipal, provincial and federal regulations. PART G: FOLLOW-UP (5.38) Section 38 of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA) requires the RA to consider whether a follow -up program for the project is appropriate in the circumstances and, if so, shall design a follow -up program and ensure its implementation. A follow -up program would determine the accuracy of the conclusions of the environmental assessment and the effectiveness of the mitigation measures. X Follow -up program is not likely required for this project. However, site monitoring (accuracy and compliance monitoring) may be conducted to verify whether required mitigation measures were implemented. The proponent must provide site access to Responsible Authority officials and/or its agents upon request. Follow -up program is required for this project. The proponent must provide site access to Responsible Authority officials and/or its agents upon request. Disposal and Redevelopment of a Portion of the Canadian Coast Guard Base: Saint John, Saint John County, New Brunswick PWGSC Project No. R. 720000.141— March 16, 2010 Page 40 of 63 323 Canadian Environmental Assessment Act - Screening Report PART H: DETERMINATION The responsible authority is required to provide a determination of the significance of environmental effects as a result of enabling this project through land disposal. The decision outlined below is based on the interpretation of impacts and mitigation described in Part D of this report. Project Name: Disposal and Redevelopment of a Portion of the Canadian Coast Guard Base PWGSC Project #: R.720000.141 Location: Saint John, Saint John County, New Brunswick Fisheries and Oceans Canada is the Federal Responsible Authority for the project as defined by the CEA Act The department has screened the project for adverse environmental effects as required under Section 5 of the CEA Act. On the basis of this screening, the department has determined that the decision opposite the "X" applies to this proposal. Technical Assessment Project not likely to cause significant adverse environmental effects - proceed. Section 20.1(a). X Project not likely to cause significant adverse environmental effects with mitigation - proceed using mitigative measures as determined. Section 20.](a). Inadequate information available - further study and assessment is required. Section 18(2). Project likely to cause significant adverse environmental effects that cannot be justified in the circumstances - project will not proceed. Section 20.1(b). Uncertain if project will cause significant adverse environmental effects - refer to the Minister of the Environment for review by a Mediator or a Panel. Section 20.1(c)(I). Project likely to cause significant adverse environmental effects that may be justified in the circumstances - refer to the Minister of the Environment for review by a Mediator or a Panel. Section 20.1(c)(4). Public Concern Public concern about the project is such that a referral to the Minister of the Environment for a review by a Mediator or a Panel is warranted. Section 20. 1 (c(iii)). X Public concern about the project is such that a referral to the Minister of the Environment for a review by a Mediator or a Panel is not warranted. Section 20. 1 (c(iii)). Disposal and Redevelopment of a Portion of the Canadian Coast Guard Base: Saint John, Saint John County, New Brunswick PWGSC Project No. R. 720000.141— March 16, 2010 Page 41 of 63 324 SCREEN M CERTIFICATE This docunmt amm917ws the results of an environmental assessment related to the above project that has been performed and completed by the Responsible Authority in accordance with the Canadian Environmental AssessmentAct. Environmental Office Date: Envir+tal Services, SC, tic Re 'on ?%e above has completed this environmental assessment screening report to the best of their ability and knowledge, and ensures that it meets the regub anent of the Canadian Envtrvmnental Assessment Act, Manager, � � s ' age, Planning and Real Estate Servi Date: DFO, A =tic Region The above has read and understood this environmental assessment screening report and acknowledges responstbillty for ensuring the mitigative owasures are hwhrded in the Environmental Disclosure Agreement and reserves the to design and brtplemem 'accuracy and compliance monitoring, if require4 and on behalf of the RA (DFO) has the authority to qpkove the foregoing CE.4A determintwom Disposal and Redevelopment of a Portion of the Canadian Coast Guard Base; Saint John, Saint ohn County, New Brunswick PWGSCProject No. 8720000.141— Afarch 16,1010 Page 42 of 63 325 Canadian Environmental A gament Act - Screening Report REFERENCES ACCDC (Atlantic Canada Conservation Data Centre) Data via PWGSC Portal. 2010. Saint John, New Brunswick. L.D. Snow, Assistant Data Manager and S. Gerriets, Senior Data Manager. Canadian Topographic Maps — Saint John, New Brunswick Natural Resources Canada, Reproduced with permission of the Minister of Public Works and Government Services Canada, 2010. URL — httpJh]] apy. nrcan.gc.e,,t/sedich /nainequei-y html Environment Canada, Canadian Wildlife Service. 2004. Species at Risk Web Mapping Application, Reproduced with permission of the Minister of Public Works and Government Services Canada, 2010. Accessed on February 15, 2010 URL— http:;,'ti vv,.sis.ec.ge.ca ec species i6c Species 'e phtinl Environment Canada. Canadian Climate Normals 1971 -2000, 2010. Saint John, New Brunswick Accessed on February 15, 2010. URL— http::/www. climate. weatheruifice.ec.�c.caicliniatc norrnals uneleK e ht►ul. Erskine, Anthony J. Atlas of Breeding Birds of the Maritime Provinces. A product of the Nova Scotia Government, 1992. Betty Tozer. Senior Assigned Real Estate Manager, Public Works and Government Services Canada. Personal Communication. August 28, 2009. Summary Report Regarding the Saint John Coast Guard Base, Saint John, New Brunswick. Reference #059136. Prepared by Conestoga - Rovers & Associates, October 14, 2009. Disposal and Redevelopment of a Portion of the Canadian Coast Guard Base: Saint John, Sainl John County, New Brunswick PWGSC Project No. R.720000.141 - March 16, 2010 Page 43 of 63 326 APPENDIX A FIGURES Page 44 of 63 327 P J � i� u in �t Figure 1: Location Map of Saint John, New Brunswick (21G/08) showing the proposed site. Each square represents 1 kni. 328 IROPOSED 1 WnYUCIrr S I iC4 SAI T J ;T Jan N] w H R Page 45 of 63 ro FIGURE 2 - STREET MAP OF PROPOSED SITE 00 uo co o. 0 a w [cY�sl b w 00 co A J O W RRIVtN�YNaq� Site Overview View From the South View From the North FIGURE 3 - SITE OVERVIEW 330 w Uc 0 a w sn•�b rwn. Phase 1 - $32,000,00 1A Renovate Existing BUildin `D to Accommodate a Consolida Coast Guard and/or Commdreie , Institutional Uses 1 B — Develop 130 Room Hotel with _ Ground Floor Commercial $pace an Underground Parking '1 1C Develop 3640 Unit Residentiala mer 1 D — Construct Underground interior Lift to Market Square 1 E — Extend the Street Grid FIGURE 4 — PHASE I OVERVIEW 331 k ' b w tro co A b O M O� w .rr� r dr�r•.r- ...rr a n.e, .Y - a 11,f1� Y I - ~�Y fir• - r�r' V • 1 �J Phase 2 - $31,660,000 = 2A — Develop 110 00 sq it Commercial I Educational Building 2B Develop 40-60 Residential Units at` Walker's Wharf 1 e 2C Develop New 260 Stall Parking FBCilrty 2D Renovate Loyalist Plaza With potential Sub - surface Parking (120 Stalls) FIGURE 5 — PHASE 2 OVERVIEW 332 �Wr y y,V b w uo 0 0 �-n w Y Y - M - _ v .s ytitl y Elm, Phase 3 — $5,050,000 3A _ Develop 20 Residential Units in a Crescent Shaped %� Budding if 38 Develop 8-12 Residential Unft.at Pnncess Shp �4 FIGURE 6 — PHASE 3 OVERVIEW 333 4 01!f , r j t } 1 Y 1 b sv oa r 0 w Overview of Phases - Phase 4. 5 -1i J � � r � On 4 L 1i' �►`- tt �..i ,- Vo V FIGURE 7 — PHASE 4 OVERVIEW 334 1 -t� /y 1� M 4A .t 1 IV IR FIGURE 8 - AERIAL VIEW OF DOWNTOWN SAINT JOHN WITH MARKED PROPERTY BOUNDARIES tA tQ 0 -n a w 335 4�0--A �7,7 SAM 40' FIGURE 9 - AERIAL VIEW OF PROJECT SITE WITH MAKRED PROPERTY BOUNDARIES KY-11 AP PM LX B RECORD OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION DETERMINATION Page 54 of 63 337 Record of Public Participation Determination Stage of work plan: Early p lann ling phase of screen'ng (pre -scop ing) Is there an indication that... Describe potential indication and issues Consider public participation? there is an existing or likely public interest in , Yes ❑ No the tvpe, location orpotential effects of the o' ct? There are members of the public with a history IYes ❑ No of being involved in past proposed projects in the area? the project has the potential to generate El Yes , No conflict between environmental and social or economic values of concern to the public? the project muv be gerceivC as having the El Yes , No potential,for significant adverse environmental effects? t there is potential to learn from community 3 Yes N No ecological? knowledge or Aboriginal traditional knowled ? there is uncertainty about potential direct and ❑ Yes I No indirect environmental effects or the signi tcance of Identified effects? the project has been or will be subject to other Public Meetings were held Residents are excited for , Yes ❑ No public participation processes that would meet the development. the objectives of the Ministerial Guideline htu.) .wi, is .ccuu.ecca,91.3006,ru)n%1erta! Lnr c /ci »u• L:htm there is any other reason why public o Yes . No rtici ation is or is not appropriate? As a result of the scan above, is public participation under CEAA appropriate in the circumstances? Yes WO -- wa..ui.as cuuuncuts to support aetermination: Environmental Effect as per the definition in CEAA is (a) any change that the project may cause in the environment, including any change it may cause to a listed wildlife species, its critical habitat or the residences of individuals of that species, as those terms are defined in the Species at Risk Act; (b) any effect of any change referred to in paragraph (a) on (i) health and socio- oconomic conditions, (ii) physical and cultural heritage, (iii) the current use of lands and resources for traditional purposes by aboriginal persons, or (iv) any structure, site or thing that is of historical, archaeological, paleontological or architectural significance; or 0 anv change to the project that may be caused by the environment, whether arty such change or effect occurs within or outside Canada, Page 55 of 63 338 APPENDIX C CANADIAN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT REGISTRY (CEAR) NOTICE OF COMMENCEMENT Page 56 of 63 339 Canadian Environmental Assessment Registry - Environmental Assessment Home Page Page 1 of I CariWlu L'tivirorurtrn'.A Ajcn:a cziratlerrie CdtldtiA AMr�eurronntasaan_V d'8va iraaa�i unubanomrc -ta a Hone >Begisigt > 10-01 -52223 Waterfront Redevelopment in Saint John, New Brunswick NOTICE OF COMMENCEMENT of an Environmental Assessment Waterfront Redevelopment in Saint John, New Brunswick Saint John (NB) January S, 2010 -- Fisheries and Oceans Canada is required to ensure that a screening is conducted commencing on January 5, 2010 in relation to the development proposal; Waterfront Redevelopment in Saint John New B The project description Includes redevelopment of the Saint John Waterfront. The Saint John Development Corporation, on behalf of the City of Saint John, intends to redevelop the former Canadian Coast Guard base in Saint John, New Brunswick. The site is a 2,43 hectare site located along Water Street, from i(ing Street to Princess Street. The overall project P40 consist of the redevelopment of the property in four phases that will be carried out over a 5-10 year period, Redevelopment of the waterfront property will include the renovation of existing buildings, extension of the existing street grid, the construction of new institutional, cmnmerrial and residential buildings and extension of the harbor passage walkway along the Aimf face, Under section 5 of the Canadian Environmental AssessmientAct, an environmental assessment Irequired in relation to this project because Fisheries and Oceans Canada may provide federal lands for the purpose of enabling this project to be carried out, For farther information on this environmental assessment, please contact- DFO - CFA Regisb•y Office - Maritimes Region P.O. Box 1006 5th Floor polaris Bldg, 8505 Dartmouth NS B2Y 4A2 Telephone 902 -,426 -5154 Email: CEAR- RCEEMar0mar.dfo mpo.oc ca and refer to CEAR reference number 10-01 -52223 Date Modifi edi 2 010.01 -0.5 http:)Aml n.ceaa.ge.eal0S0 details- eng.rfm ?evaluation=i??3 1.,M2010 Page 57 of 63 340 SCHEDULE "C" TO AN AGREEMENT OF PURCHASE AND SALE BETWEEN CANADA AS REPRESENTED BY THE MINISTER OF FISHERIES AND OCEANS AND THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN, DATED THE DAY OF .2011. THIS LICENCE made in triplicate this day of A.D., 2011. BETWEEN: F_ :_,! 1� HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA ( "Her Majesty ") as represented by the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans (hereinafter called the "Licensor ") OF THE FIRST PART THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN, a body corporate by Royal Charter confirmed and amended by Acts of the Legislative Assembly of the Province of New Brunswick (hereinafter called the "Licensee ") OF THE SECOND PART WHEREAS the Licensor is the owner of the Lands more particularly described in Schedule "A" annexed hereto and forming a part hereof; and, WHEREAS the Licensor is intending to convey the Lands to the Licensee and pursuant to the Sales Agreement to which this license is Schedule "C ". WHEREAS the Licensor has agreed to grant the within License upon the terms and conditions hereinafter set out for the purposes of Licensee entering on the land and to make certain enquiries and investigations in furtherance of and prior to the closing of the aforesaid transaction. NOW THEREFORE THIS INDENTURE WITNESSETH that for and in consideration of the sum of One Dollar ($1.00) lawful money of Canada and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, the Licensor, subject to the terms, conditions, covenants and provisions herein contained, does hereby give permission and a revocable license to the Licensee, its servants, agents, employees, contractors and invitees to enter into and upon and exit from the Lands described in Schedule "A" for the purpose of making such investigations and conducting such tests and analysis and viewing all aspects of the Lands in furtherance of its due diligence; and undertaking testing, drilling and analysis as may be reasonably necessary as well as undertaking such activities approved in writing by the Licensor which are necessarily incidental thereto during the term of this License and for no other purpose, subject to the following terms and conditions: 1. The term of this License shall commence on the day of , 2011 and conclude with the closing of the aforesaid sale of the Lands described in Schedule "A ". 2. The Licensee shall not enter upon the Lands without first giving reasonable written notice to the Licensor which notice shall include: (a) The date time and place of the proposed investigation; Page 58 of 63 341 (b) The specific activity and the purpose for which the activity is being carried out; (c) The reason why the proposed activity is necessary and the objective of the test; (d) The extent to which the activity shall disrupt, displace interfere with or otherwise affect the Lands complete with any technical drawings that may be in the possession of the licensee; (e) The extent to which the planned activity may interfere with the activities of the Licensor , its employees, contractors , subcontractors or others who have a lawful right to be on the Lands; (f) The Licensee's plan to remediate against any such disruption and to replace, repair and to reestablish the Lands to its previous state. 3. Upon receipt of this Proposed Activity Report the Licensor shall respond in writing giving or refusing specific permission to the Licensor which permission shall not be unreasonably withheld. 4. The Licensee shall not have any claim against the Licensor for loss or damage of any nature, kind or description whatsoever arising from the exercise or purported exercise of the License herein granted, unless such loss or damage is due to the negligence of the Licensor or its employees, servants or agents. 5. The Licensee shall, at its sole cost, obtain and keep in force during the term of this License, comprehensive general liability insurance for bodily injury and property damage in the joint names of the Licensor and the Licensee, which coverage shall have an inclusive limit of not less than Two Million Dollars ($2,000,000.00). 6. That notwithstanding Clause 3 hereof it does hereby indemnify and save harmless the Licensor from all damages, claims, demands, actions, suits or other proceedings [including all legal fees on a solicitor client basis and all other expenses associated with defending any claim] by whomsoever made, brought or prosecuted in any manner and whether in respect of property owned by the Licensee or others or in respect of damage sustained by the Licensee or others based upon or arising out of or in connection with this License or anything done or purported to be done in any manner hereunder. 7. That in the event the Licensee uses any equipment in the course of its investigations it shall immediately upon the conclusion of the investigation, at its own expense, remove from the Lands any and all chattels brought or placed upon the said Lands by the Licensee. 8. That it shall at all time and at its own expense, keep the Lands free from all garbage and debris related to its operations. 9. That it shall at all times during the term hereof maintain the Lands in a condition compatible with the standards of the Licensee and comply with all rules and regulations applicable to the Lands 10. It shall comply with all laws in the exercise of the license and occupation of the Lands. 11. If the Licensee breaches any of the terms or conditions contained in this License, then and in every such case the Licensor may by notice in writing immediately terminate this License nor any condoning, excusing or overlooking by the Licensor on previous occasions of breaches or non - performance of the Licensee's obligations shall be taken as a waiver of these conditions or any way defeat or affect the rights of the Licensor hereunder. Page 59 of 63 342 12. There shall be no assignment of this License or any rights granted herein. 13. Nothing contained herein shall create any interest in the Lands in the Licensee. 14. This License Agreement forms the entire agreement between the parties and cancels and supersedes any prior agreements, undertakings, declarations or representations, written or verbal, in respect to the matters dealt with herein. 15. No amendment, supplement or waiver of any provision of this agreement or any other agreements provided for or contemplated, nor any consent to any departure by the City, shall in any event be effective unless it shall be in writing and signed by the Minister and then such amendment, waiver or consent shall be effective only in the specific instance for the specific purpose for which it has been given. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the City of Saint John has here unto set its corporate seal duly attested by the signature of their properly authorized officers and the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans has duly executed on the day and year first above written. SIGNED, SEALED AND DELIVERED In the presence of HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA, as represented by the Minister of Public Works and Government Services Canada on behalf of the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans Witness (Please Print) ) Per: Title ) SIGNED, SEALED AND DELIVERED in the presence of THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN Per: ) Mayor ) And: ) Per: Common Clerk ) Common Council } Resolution: ) 343 Signature Signature Page 60 of 63 SCHEDULE "A" TO A LICENCE BETWEEN CANADA AS REPRESENTED BY THE MINISTER OF FISHERIES AND OCEANS AND THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN, DATED THE DAY OF , 2011. ALL THOSE CERTAIN lands and premises situate lying and being in the City of Saint John and in the County of Saint John in the Province of New Brunswick more particularly described as follows: LOT 2008 -1 BEING Lot 2008 -1 on a Subdivision Plan entitled "H.M. in right of Canada" [and having internal Public Works and Government Services Canada number S- 5445 -1], dated June 10, 2010, approved by the Development Officer for the City of Saint John on the 24th day of September, 2010 and filed in the Registry Office for the County of Saint John as Plan number 29301794 on October 1, 2010 LOT 2008 -2 BEING Lot 2008 -2 on a Subdivision Plan entitled "H.M. in right of Canada" [and having internal Public Works and Government Services Canada number S- 5445 -1], dated June 10, 2010, approved by the Development Officer for the City of Saint John on the 24th day of September, 2010 and filed in the Registry Office for the County of Saint John as Plan number 29301794 on October 1, 2010 Page 61 of 63 344 PROVINCE OF NEW BRUNSWICK COUNTY OF SAINT JOHN of the , and Province of , make oath and say in the County of 1. That I am the Assistant Common Clerk of the City of Saint John and have custody of the Common Seal hereof. 2. The seal to the foregoing instrument affixed is the Common Seal of the said City of Saint John and that it was so affixed by Order of the Common Council of the said City. 3. T That the signature " , Mayor " to the said instrument is the signature of of the said City, and the signature " thereto is my own signature. 4. That we are the proper officers to sign the foregoing instrument on behalf of the City of Saint John. SWORN TO at the City of Saint John, in the County of Saint John, in the Province of New Brunswick, this _ day of 92011 BEFORE ME: A Commissioner of Oaths Being a Solicitor 345 Page 62 of 63 DATED: BETWEEN: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA as represented by the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans; (hereinafter referred to as "DFO ") -and- THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN, a body corporate by Royal Charter confirmed and amended by Acts of the Legislative Assembly of the Province of New Brunswick pursuant to the laws of the Province of New Brunswick (hereinafter referred to as the "CITY ") MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT OF PURCHASE AND SALE DOJ File No. 740 -123 Department of Public Works and Government Services Legal Services 1713 Bedford Row PO Box 2247 Halifax, Nova Scotia B3J 3C9 R. Alex Mills, Counsel, Department of Justice Page 63 of 63 346 January 26, 2011 BY E -MAIL His Worship Mayor Ivan Court & Members of Common Council City of Saint John 15 Market Square PO Box t971 Saint John, NB E2L 4L1 Your Worship and Councillors: Re: The City of Saint John - Taxation Review Committee — Status Update In early 2010, the City formed a Taxation Review Committee (the "Committee ") made up of councillors and members of the public. The mandate of the Committee is as follows: The role of the Taxation Review Committee is to review, study and report to Council with respect to taxation and spending by the City, and to make recommendations as to whether tax cuts are achievable, given the current and future commitments of the City of Saint John, while at the same time enhancing quality of life and aggressively pursuing prosperity, all with a goal of determining a fair and appropriate level of taxation for our citizens. The purpose of this letter is to provide a brief report on the Committee's activities to date. The Committee held its first meeting on February 22, 2010, at the time under the chairmanship of then Councillor Carl Killen. The Committee met on a monthly basis throughout the spring, summer and fall of 2010. Former Councillor Killen was elected to the New Brunswick Legislature in September, 2010, at which point the Committee lost its chair. Councillor Gary Sullivan has since taken the place of Councillor Killen on the Committee. At the meeting of the Committee held on November 17, 2010, the undersigned and Councillor Sullivan were elected co- chairs of the Committee. To date, the Committee has received reports and /or presentations on a number of topics, including: • Overview of 2010 Operating Budget • Overview of New Service Based Approach to Budgeting • City of Saint John 2010 Service Based Budget 682219A 347 January 26, 2011 Page 2 • Overview of New Brunswick Property Assessment Process given by representatives from Service New Brunswick • Building Stronger Local Governments and Regions - An Action Plan For the Future of Local Governance in New Brunswick (the "Finn Report ") — Executive Summary • Options For Financing Services and Infrastructure in the City of Saint John (the "Slack Report ") • Final Report of the City of Moncton Taxation Review Committee The question of whether "tax cuts are achievable" is challenging, particularly given the uncertainty surrounding what actions the Provincial Government may take on issues such as the Finn Report and property assessments. That said, the Committee believes that it can produce a report to Council which will be of some value and will include general and specific recommendations aimed at ensuring that taxation levels in the City are appropriate. At its meeting on January 19, 2011, the Committee considered the time that it would need to complete its work and report to Council, and believes that this can be done by September, 2011. submitted, Co -Chair cc. Councillor Gary Sullivan NLL /lmr 682219.0 Committee 348 ,__..ENTERPRISE SAINT JOHN Inspiring people, ideas & investment January 27, 2011 Mayor Ivan Court Members of Common Council City of Saint John PO Box 1971 Saint John, NB E2L 41_1 Your Worship and Members of Common Council, RE: Proposed Economic Development Task Force As a result of discussions at this week's Common Council meeting and the resulting budget implication to Enterprise Saint John, the Board of Directors respectfully requests that Common Council appoint a task force or consider another collaborative approach to explore and evaluate the various models for economic development. If agreed to, and in support of a collaborative approach, the task force could comprise the Mayor, several members of Common Council, the City Manager, the Chair of Enterprise Saint John, the Vice - President of UNB Saint John, a representative of the Saint John Board of Trade and others as appropriate. It is anticipated that consideration of various models of economic development will require research on best practices in economic development. Enterprise Saint John is prepared to allocate reasonable resources toward this assistance. While there are some differences of opinion by Enterprise Saint John and members of Common Council as to the best approach to economic development, I think it is safe to say we can all agree on the importance of creating and supporting the most effective model possible to move our community forward. The budget crisis facing Enterprise Saint John requires that this process move quickly and the task force be mandated to report back to Common Council with recommendations by April 30, 2011. Sincerely, Tony Gogan Chair, Enterprise Saint John Grand Bay - Westfield • Quispamsis • Rothesay • St. Martins • Saint John 349 ,__..ENTERPRISE SAINT JOHN Inspiring people, ideas & investment January 25, 2010 Mayor Ivan Court Members of Common Council City of Saint John PO Box 1971 Saint John, NB E2L 41_1 Your Worship and Members of Common Council, RE: Enterprise Saint John Inspires Economic Development in Priority Neighbourhoods It was a pleasure meeting with you and members of Common Council this past December in Committee of the Whole. As always, we welcome input and guidance in our economic development efforts from one of our key stakeholders, the City of Saint John. During the question and answer period, Councillor Higgins asked about our plan to grow business in the city's Old North End. I am pleased to report to you and the members of Common Council that we have been very active in many business building efforts in the Old North End as well as each of the other priority neighbourhoods. We also look forward to continuing our poverty reduction efforts into 2011 and beyond. We recognize that economic growth is a precondition for social progress. We strive to create economic activity and new jobs so that all of our citizens benefit. The economy must serve the needs of the people, not the other way around. It's no secret that Saint John has had its fair share of social issues. We have had entrenched poverty for generations in parts of the city and unacceptably high drop out rates. But we are seeing progress, real progress. We have the largest private sector workforce in the province, our workforce participation rate has never been higher, household median incomes are up dramatically and poverty rates are dropping. Below are some of the specific activities where we have been directly involved with in the Old North End and other priority neighbourhoods: 1. Collaborated with the Community Loan Fund to deliver monthly workshops from September 2009 to April 2010 to residents of the Old North End and Crescent Valley on Grand Bay - Westfield • Quispamsis • Rothesay • St. Martins • Saint John 350 the following topics: • Evaluating entrepreneurial potential • Business idea creation • Feasibility of business ideas • Cooperative business structures 2. Provided one -on -one business consultations with a number of young entrepreneurs to establish businesses, including: • Good Fortune Take -Out —Churchill Boulevard • Lucky Star Market — Lansdowne Avenue • QQ Bubble Tea — Lansdowne Avenue • Great Wall Store — Churchill Boulevard • EVO Electronics — Prince Edward Street • Yuki Huang's new 4 -unit commercial and residential development — Lansdowne Avenue 3. Two staff participated on a working committee with Councillor McGuire, the Director and a Board member of the Crescent Valley Resource Centre on an initiative to help youth in the area find summer employment. 4. Worked with Councillor McGuire and Minister Keir's office to secure funding through the SEED program to hire four students living in the Old North End. 5. Last Christmas, our Board and staff sponsored a single father and his two young children living in Crescent Valley. 6. Partnered with Vibrant Communities and provided funding to conduct a door -to -door survey of Crescent Valley residents to determine skills and interest in entrepreneurship. 7. Provided business consultation to the Lansdowne Place team to pursue business expansion opportunities. 8. Worked with Pivotal Payments, a new contact centre, as they attempted to locate in the former Eddie Bauer Space. They ultimately did not land in that space but they did locate in the Old North End with space in Place 400. 9. Provided support for the Saint John Y locating in the Old North End. Two staff members are active Saint John Y Board members, helping to ensure no one is ever turned away from access to child care, fitness and the ability to attend camp. Enterprise Saint John also actively participates in labour attachment initiatives for individuals who lack the necessary skills or face barriers that limit or prohibit them from entering or re- entering the workforce. This forms Saint John's transitional labour force, and provides a tremendous win- win -win opportunity for people living in poverty, employers and the broader Grand Bay - Westfield • Quispamsis • Rothesay • St. Martins • Saint John 351 community. The following are some of the transitional workforce programs Enterprise Saint John has supported over the past year: • Provided strategic guidance as a member of the Leadership Committee for "Ties 2 Work ". • Sponsored and participated in the 3rd "Catch the Wave to Employment" workshop for a total of 126 participants from every priority neighbourhood and 17 employers over the course of the year. • Provided staff support for the SJ Votes! Committee as part of the Urban Core Support Network's Policy Advisory Committee (UCSN PAC) to encourage voter participation during the September 2010 provincial election. • Facilitated employer participation and communications support for Vibrant Communities' "Job Bus Fair" which resulted in 42 participants and 15 employers over five Job Buses since February 2009. • Provided ongoing assistance as requested by the Human Development Council for the "Making Work Pay" and "Living Wage" initiatives. Enterprise Saint John has fostered a long standing relationship with the Saint John region's business network (employers) due to our hands -on business retention and support strategies. As a result, anti - poverty organizations like Vibrant Communities, the Business Community Anti - Poverty Initiative (BCAPI), Crescent Valley Community Centre and the Urban Core Support Network rely on our organization to engage and inform this business network of their current programs which require employer involvement to be successful. As your Economic Development Agency, we strive to ensure our objectives complement the City's including strategic alignment with PlanSJ. The attraction of investment and business development to the old North End, and all of the priority neighbourhoods, has been and will continue to be a challenge. We are optimistic that PlanSJ will help address this challenge through integrated strategies to retain and attract residents as well as support and encourage investment. We look forward to working closely with you and members of Common Council as we work together to continue making this a community where we can all live life on our own terms. Sincerely, Tony Gogan Chair, Enterprise Saint John Grand Bay - Westfield • Quispamsis • Rothesay • St. Martins • Saint John 352 Planning Advisory Committee January 20, 2011 Your Worship and Councillors: P.O. Box 1971 506 658 -2800 Saint John New Brunswick Canada E2L 4L1 SUBJECT: 425 Rothesay Avenue - Subdivision Application The Committee considered the attached report at its January 18, 2011 meeting. ���'A City of Saint John Paul Wilson appeared on behalf the City of Saint John, the applicant, and spoke in favour of staff's recommendation. No one else appeared before the Committee to speak in favour or against the application and no letters were received. After considering the report and comments made by the applicant, the Committee recommended approval of the subdivision of the subject property. RECOMMENDATION: That Common Council assent to the submitted OSCO Properties Limited subdivision at 425 Rothesay Avenue, with respect to the vesting of an approximately 130- square -metre (1,400- square -foot) parcel of land for the widening of the Rothesay Avenue public street right -of -way, as well as to any required municipal services easements or public utility easements. Respectfully submitted, C"o m Murray, Chairman X Project No. 11 -435 353 F =4 DATE: TO: FROM: FOR: PREPARED BY: Jody Kliffer Planner SUBJECT: Name of Applicant: Name of Owner: Location: PID: Municipal Plan: Zoning: Proposal: Type of Application: JANUARY 14, 2011 PLANNING ADVISORY COMMITTEE COMMUNITY PLANNING # PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT MEETING OF JANUARY 18, 2011 REVIEWED BY: Ken Forrest, MCIP, RPP Commissioner City of Saint John OSCO Properties Limited 425 Rothesay Avenue 55203053 Service Corridor "I -I" Light Industrial To vest a portion of the street and sidewalk Subdivision JURISDICTION OF COMMITTEE: The Community Planning Act authorizes the Planning Advisory Committee to give its views to Common Council concerning the subdivision of land, including the assent of streets, land for public purposes, and municipal services and public utility easements, as well as cost sharing for piping materials outside the limits of the subdivision, and the authorization of City/Developer Subdivision Agreements. 4 SAINT JOHN P.O. Box 1971rSaint john, NB Canada E2L 4L1 I wwwsaintjohn.ca I C.P. 1971 Saint John, N. -B. Canada E2L 4L1 354 City of Saint John Page 2 425 Rothesay Avenue January 13, 2011 STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO COMMITTEE: That Common Council assent to the submitted OSCO Properties Limited Subdivision at 425 Rothesay Avenue, with respect to the vesting of an approximately 130- square -metre (1,400 - square -foot) parcel of land for the widening of the Rothesay Avenue public street right -of -way, as well as to any required municipal services easements or public utility easements. INPUT FROM OTHER SOURCES: Municipal Operations and Engineering has no concerns with this application. Buildings and Inspection Services has no concerns with this application. Saint John Energy has been advised of this application. Bell Aliant has been advised of this application. Rogers has been advised of this application. Maritimes & Northeast Pipeline, Enbridge Gas and Brunswick Pipeline have advised that Maritimes & Northeast Pipeline have no concerns with this application; however, Brunswick Pipeline has stated that in the event that there is more on -site work to be done, a full development review will have to occur. If no work needs to be done, then permission is granted to proceed with the street widening with the following authorization/clearance number: BP1101111356. ANALYSIS: Planning and Development has received a tentative subdivision plan from the City's Real Estate branch (attached), which illustrates the land requirements for the reconstructed Rothesay Avenue, with respect to the area in front of 425 Rothesay Avenue. The property that is the subject of the current application is illustrated on the attached area map. The reconstruction of the street in this area was completed some time ago, but the City was unable to reach agreement with the owner of the property concerning acquisition of the land. The property has recently changed hands and an agreement in this regard has been reached with the new owner, OSCO Properties Limited. The City proposes that the 130- square -metre sliver of land illustrated on the attached tentative subdivision plan would vest as part of the public street right -of -way. This requires the assent of Common Council, and a recommendation from the Planning Advisory Committee. As the site is currently undeveloped, there are no variances required for such things as reduced yards or landscaped areas. Assent to the proposed street vesting is recommended. X Project No. 11 -435 355 PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT /URBANISME ET DEVELOPPEMENT ♦ m ♦� IM .« '♦ I 1 .» .a Subject Site /site en question: Location: 425, avenue Rothesay Avenue Date: December 22 decembre 2010 Scale /echelle: Not to scale /Pas a 1'echelle 356 as, _0 SC PID(s) /NIP(s): 55203053 v �+ ♦t M� a ♦, M A «n T • ♦ • • ♦ «r w ♦ w ♦ w 1 • ♦ W ♦ ♦ • ♦, C1 ♦ m ♦� IM .« '♦ I 1 .» .a Subject Site /site en question: Location: 425, avenue Rothesay Avenue Date: December 22 decembre 2010 Scale /echelle: Not to scale /Pas a 1'echelle 356 as, _0 SC PID(s) /NIP(s): 55203053 v �+ ♦t M� a ♦, M A «n T 357 / (o° b zo // si. "•� �� n 3 e e s � h C N � • N$ / omo� 009 �(/ I ors 609.4 I 0:40, f Lr �9a. sO,I,La T oes°or a�J %Jea N''YIa�T OJ' \. o �Q E $ no'f ° ci9 ° $ c °•n�n°e�e '$^ ��ra,.$m 0 in > CF � � \ o �g v -°• a _.4'iiE�> aB o DY $ p T� N"N — °N s C }o gg?v -s6 a U n c- C ZU° ° 0.r °`�l t g5�'Y (n � � e o ° �nry •Tom O 7H o -° KsO« ve. X •°min N'an �ln Oc,C Q1 eq T U z°N zi on$2. vA S c 5 1y1 a; 8 gz"lz ic._ LQ c0 E�C E° CL 8 c ° 76 N �hn� � i-� p�U C !! so 0 iL \ / V � V o � oss 9cs z +�\ CL J� O N p Ln O r-I 357 / (o° b zo // si. "•� �� n 3 e e s EL / omo� 009 �(/ I ors 609.4 I 0:40, f Lr �9a. sO,I,La T oes°or a�J %Jea N''YIa�T OJ' \. \ S rsoro, oy = o� so rd OJ d 17 \ o X09 9Cs z \ -}- C }o \ � n 0 rrsies6�� °`�l ovaµ n!h ve. E IS \ Dc� \ / V � oss 9cs z +�\ CL J� 357 January 20, 2011 Your Worship and Councillors: SUBJECT: 425 Rothesay Avenue - Subdivision Application The Committee considered the attached report at its January 18, 2011 meeting. Paul Wilson appeared on behalf the City of Saint John, the applicant, and spoke in favour of staff's recommendation. No one else appeared before the Committee to speak in favour or against the application and no letters were received. After considering the report and comments made by the applicant, the Committee recommended approval of the subdivision of the subject property. RECOMMENDATION: That Common Council assent to the submitted OSCO Properties Limited subdivision at 425 Rothesay Avenue, with respect to the vesting of an approximately 130 - square -metre (1,400- square -foot) parcel of land for the widening of the Rothesay Avenue public street right -of -way, as well as to any required municipal services easements or public utility easements. Respectfully submitted, Colin Murray, Chairman X Project No. 11-435 358 DATE: JANUARY 14, 2011 TO: PLANNING ADVISORY COMMITTEE FROM: COMMUNITY PLANNING • PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT FOR: MEETING OF JANUARY 18, 2011 PREPARED BY: REVIEWED BY: Jody Kliffer Ken Forrest, MCIP, RPP Planner Commissioner SUBJECT: Name of Applicant: City of Saint John Name of Owner: OSCO Properties Limited Location: 425 Rothesay Avenue PID: 55203053 Municipal Plan: Service Corridor Zoning: "I -1" Light Industrial Proposal: To vest a portion of the street and sidewalk 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 subdivision of land, including the assent of streets, land for public purposes, and municipal services and public utility easements, as well as cost sharing for piping materials outside the limits of the subdivision, and the authorization of City/Developer Subdivision Agreements. 359 City of Saint John Page 2 425 Rothesay Avenue January 13, 2011 STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO COMMITTEE: That Common Council assent to the submitted OSCO Properties Limited Subdivision at 425 Rothesay Avenue, with respect to the vesting of an approximately 130 - square -metre (1,400- square -foot) parcel of land for the widening of the Rothesay Avenue public street right -of -way, as well as to any required municipal services easements or public utility easements. INPUT FROM OTHER SOURCES: Municipal Operations and Engineering has no concerns with this application. Buildings and Inspection Services has no concerns with this application. Saint John Energy has been advised of this application. Bell Aliant has been advised of this application. Rogers has been advised of this application. Maritimes & Northeast Pipeline, Enbridge Gas and Brunswick Pipeline have advised that Maritimes & Northeast Pipeline have no concerns with this application; however, Brunswick Pipeline has stated that in the event that there is more on -site work to be done, a full development review will have to occur. If no work needs to be done, then permission is granted to proceed with the street widening with the following authorization/clearance number: BPI 101111356. ANALYSIS: Planning and Development has received a tentative subdivision plan from the City's Real Estate branch (attached), which illustrates the land requirements for the reconstructed Rothesay Avenue, with respect to the area in front of 425 Rothesay Avenue. The property that is the subject of the current application is illustrated on the attached area map. The reconstruction of the street in this area was completed some time ago, but the City was unable to reach agreement with the owner of the property concerning acquisition of the land. The property has recently changed hands and an agreement in this regard has been reached with the new owner, OSCO Properties Limited. The City proposes that the 130 - square -metre sliver of land illustrated on the attached tentative subdivision plan would vest as part of the public street right -of -way. This requires the assent of Common Council, and a recommendation from the Planning Advisory Committee. As the site is currently undeveloped, there are no variances required for such things as reduced yards or landscaped areas. Assent to the proposed street vesting is recommended. JK Project No. 11-435 360 PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT/URBANISME ET DEVELOPPEMENT Ht 0,• • a. Subject Site /site en question: Location: 425, avenue Rothesay Avenue Date: December 22 d6cembre 2010 Scale /echelle: Not to scale /Pas a Mchelle 361 8Y I0 SC PID(s) /NIP(s): 55203053 *i a � 1./ i i i i i i i i • • M w •� M � w � • • v • • • i i • 1 • • o • 1 • Ht 0,• • a. Subject Site /site en question: Location: 425, avenue Rothesay Avenue Date: December 22 d6cembre 2010 Scale /echelle: Not to scale /Pas a Mchelle 361 8Y I0 SC PID(s) /NIP(s): 55203053 *i a � 1./ m N 3ppp U � N N INNy 3 v c 3 o a> >, v V- NH 7 y p4S 3'0 a'° E o n����� «•' N.. Zgo is y O •C IL S L �� 5 ,0 � �" T y >ije c N a 20..111 O ++�$ 2 ° m ° 0 o e �ea8 tl aNi X 7 > ° N u m i S v S u„ ��I� d� y N �>, U m $ £N zr 3 o a E` ¢M �Y da'uri 2 4�fiY ^�i Nom. a�a� bh, \ V oss scs z / i 8 - // '•r, \ ro c.�;d !a :d shy Tosay�o� A� pp fa � e i4 � o�,•ffie4 � \ an4a�a��sv orb �. J1 # ��00� ` sf, sa raj \, \ b �70 a 5R O Of a. CL ` /aJ �r �v ,0a 362 nm c z u m B�O co r •3 E � Rg° �uj m ° o IR o a wogs / 5 >' 2 REPORT TO COMMON COUNCIL qk January 27, 2011 The City of Saint john Mayor Ivan Court and And Members of Common Council Your Worship and Members of Council: SUBJECT: LAND ACQUISITION — 425 ROTHESAY AVENUE The attached letter from the Solicitor's office to the City Manager is self explanatory. As a result it would be appropriate for Council to adopt the following resolution: RECOMMENDATION: That the Agreement of Purchase and Sale authorized by Common Council resolution adopted November 29, 2010 be amended so that the closing date shall be "on or before February 28, 2011" and in all other respects the said Agreement remains unchanged. Respectfully bmitted, k atrick Woods, CGA MANAGER Enc. 363 January 27, 2011 Pat Woods CITY MANAGER City of Saint John Saint John, N.B. E21- 411 Dear Mr. Woods, RE: LAND ACQUISITION- 425ROTHESAYAVENUE Common Council, meeting on November 29, 2010 adopted the following resolution: "That as recommended by the City Manager in the submitted report M &C 2010 -383: Land Acquisition — 425 Rothesay Avenue, Common Council enter into the Agreement of Purchase and Sale between the City and OSCO Properties Limited submitted with said report on the terms and conditions of said Agreement and that the Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to sign all required documentation." The said Agreement provides for a closing date "on or before January 31, 2011." The lands being acquired by the City pursuant to the said Agreement are for street widening and title will vest in the City upon the filing of a subdivision plan in the Land Titles /Registry Office (Saint John). The Planning Advisory Committee (PAC) considered the subdivision at its meeting of January 18, 2011. The PAC recommendation will be presented to Common Council at its meeting of January 31, 2011 and as the closing cannot occur until Common Council addresses the PAC recommendation the closing date must be extended beyond January 31, 2011. I have been advised that the City still requires the land for street widening and that the vendor has agreed that the closing date be extended to February 28, 2011. That being said, the following recommendation may be made to Common Council: lr _ SAINT JOHN P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, NB Canada E2L 4L1 I www.saintjohn.ca I C.P. 1971 Saint John, N. -B. Canada E21- 4L1 364 Page Two Letter to Pat Woods, City Manager Re: Land Acquisition — 425 Rothesay Avenue That the Agreement of Purchase and Sale authorized by Common Council resolution adopted November 29, 2010 be amended so that the closing date shall be "on or before February 28, 2011" and in all other respects the said Agreement remains unchanged. Yours truly, i t d a- i ' Lynda D. arrell SOLICITOR 365 1 January 27, 2011 Deputy Mayor and Councillors Subject: Committee of the Whole Reporting to Council The Committee of the Whole, having met on December 20, 2010, adopted the following resolution: "RESOLVED that Committee of the Whole recommends Common Council authorize the engineering services agreement with Crandall Engineering Limited for the Thorne Avenue Lift Station #4, Sanitary Force main and Sanitary Collector Sewer project to be increased to $2,098,619.10 as outlined in the submitted report, and further, authorize staff to proceed with the tendering process for the project." Sincerely, Ivan Court Mayor SAINT JOHN P.O. Sox 1 SM Saint John, N5 Canada E2L 40 I www. WntOhn.ca I C.P. 1971 Sairo# john, N. -B, Canada ESL 4L1 366 January 7, 2011 Mr. Walter M. Vincent 50 -20 Bnmwood Blvd Toronto ON M1V 1B7 Your Worship and Councillors City of Saint John P.O. Box 1971 E21- 41-1 Dear Sirs: Replying to your request for a Letter to Council requesting a meeting between myself and the present Council in the Committee of the Whole to discuss a delicate land matter that has been on the agenda for 22 years. I have had conversations with Deputy Stephen Chase and this request is the result of my contact. Over the years I, or my solicitor, Eric Teed, have written approximately twenty letters and had personal contacts with many others which have passed on without resolve. I could not possibly give you the many details and specifics of my problem in this letter except to say that I have condensed a 5 112-+ acre of land in west Saint John which could involve a sizable upgraded land development overlooking the Bay of Fundy with a possible assessment exceeding $200,000 per annum. I had intended to come to Saint John to meet with my legal representatives having exhausted all of my options, but Mr. Chase has agreed to put this problem in motion before Council and, hopefully, in Committee of the Whole, to come up with an amicable solution. I will be waiting to here from you as soon as possible. I remain sinncer 'r, Walter ent 367