Loading...
2011-08-29_Agenda Packet--Dossier de l'ordre du jourCity of Saint John Common Council Meeting Monday, August 29, 2011 Committee of the Whole 1. Call to Order 4:30 p.m. 8th Floor Boardroom City Hall 1.0 Minutes 1.1 Property Matter 10.2(4)(d) 1.2 Employment Matter 10.2(4)0) 1.3 Property Matter 10.2(4)(d) 1.4 Property Matter 10.2(4)(d) 1.5 Legal Opinion 10.2(4)(f) Si vous auriez besoin des services en frangais pour une r6union de Conseil Communal, veuillez contacter le bureau de la greffi&re communale au 658 -2862 Regular Meeting 1. Call to Order — Prayer 6:00 p.m. Council Chamber 2. Approval of Minutes 2.1 Minutes of August 2, 2011 3. Adoption of Agenda 4. Disclosures of Conflict of Interest Items Forwarded from Previous Agendas 4.1 City Manager: Wellfield Protection - Harbourview Subdivision 4.2a) Solid Waste Management Service - Outsource Decision 4.2b) City Manager: Community Solid Waste Management Service 4.3 Standing Committee System (Councillor Titus) Tabled on August 15, 2011 4.4 Council Budget - Salaries (Councillor Titus) Tabled on August 15, 2011 4.5 Sydney Street Courthouse (Councillor Titus) Tabled on August 15, 2011 5. Consent Agenda 5.1 Proposed Public Hearing Date 1 Plaza Avenue (Recommendation in Report) 5.2 Initiate Stop- Up and Close Southern Tip of Water St (Recommendation in Report) 5.3 Hitachi Crescent Subdivision - Galbraith Construction Limited (Recommendation in Report) 5.4 Tender for 18 Scott Air Packs and Accessories Saint John Fire Department (Recommendation in Report) 5.5 Tender for Plow Blades and Edges (Recommendation in Report) 5.6 Chip Seal 2011 (Recommendation in Report) 5.7 Crack Sealing 2011 (Recommendation in Report) 5.8 Millidge Ave, Skaling Crt, Woodward Ave and Black St - Storm Sewer Separation (Recommendation in Report) 5.9 Sales Engagement Confidentiality Agreement (Non Disclosure Agreement) Between the City and Taleo (Recommendation in Report) 5.10 New Brunswick Medical Education Trust Request to Present (Recommendation: Refer to Clerk to Schedule) 6. Members Comments 7. Proclamation 7.1 United Way Day - Thursday, September 1 st, 2011 7.2 Seafarers Month September 2011 7.3 Arthritis Awareness Month September 2011 8. Delegations / Presentations 9. Public Hearings 7:00 p.m. 9.1(a) Proposed Zoning By -Law Amendment 192 -194 St. James Street West 9.1(b) Planning Advisory Committee Report Recommending Rezoning with Section 39 Conditions 9.2(a) Proposed Zoning By -Law Amendment 1035 Burchill Road 9.2(b) Planning Advisory Committee Report Recommending Re- zoning with Section 39 Conditions 10. Consideration of By -laws 10.1 Third Reading Proposed Repeal of Fire - Damaged Buildings By -Law 10.2 Proposed Municipal Plan Amendment - 109 to 113 Prince Edward St and 27 Richmond St 11. Submissions by Council Members 11.0 Chalk Art and Busking on City Streets (Mayor Court) 11.1 Available Development Lots (Councillor Sullivan) 11.2 Record of Motions (Councillor Farren) 11.3 Environmental Impact Assessment for West side Power Line Proposal (Councillor McGuire) 11.4 West Saint John Unsightly Premises (Councillor McGuire) 12. Business Matters - Municipal Officers 12.1 City Manager: Traffic Impacts - Tim Hortons 222 Bayside Drive 12.2 City Manager: Municipality of Saint John Four Year Capital Investment Plan Respecting the "Gas Tax Fund Agreement" (2010 -2013) 12.3 Commissioner of Finance: Capital Financing 12.4 City Manager: Milford Storm Sewer Separation Phase 1 13. Committee Reports 13.1 Planning Advisory Committee: Request for Additional City Staff at PAC meetings 14. Consideration of Issues Separated from Consent Agenda 15. General Correspondence 15.1 Conservation Council of New Brunswick and Friends of Rockwood Park: Restoration of 1671 Sandy Point Rd 16. Adjournment City of Saint John Seance du conseil communal Le lundi 29 aont 2011 Comite plenier 1.Ouverture de la seance 16 h 30 — Salle de conference, 8' Rage, h6tel de ville 0 Proces- verbal 1.1 Question relative aux biens -fonds — alinea 10.2(4)d) 1.2 Questions relatives a 1'emploi — alinea 10.2(4)j) 1.3 Question relative aux biens -fonds — alinea 10.2(4)d) 1.4 Question relative aux biens -fonds — alinea 10.2(4)d) 1.5 Avis juridique — alinea 10.2(4)f) Si vous avez besoin de services en frangais lors d'une reunion du Conseil communal, veuillez contacter le bureau de la greffiere communale au 658 -2862. 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 seance tenue le 2 aout 2011 3. Adoption de 1'ordre du jour 4. Divulgations de conflits d'int6rets Points report6s des ordres du jour precedents 4.1 Directeur general : Protection des champs de captage — Lotissement Harbourview 4.2a) Service de gestion des dechets solides — Decision liee a l'impartition 4.2b) Directeur general : Service communautaire de gestion des dechets solides 4.3 Systeme des comites permanents (conseiller Titus) — Point reporte lors de la reunion du 15 aout 2011 4.4 Budget du conseil — Salaires (conseiller Titus) — Point reporte lors de la reunion du 15 aout 2011 4.5 Palais de justice de la rue Sydney (conseiller Titus) — Point reporte lors de la reunion du 15 aout 2011 5. Questions soumises i Papprobation du conseil 5.1 Date proposee pour les audiences publiques visant le 1, avenue Plaza (recommandation figurant au rapport) 5.2 D6but de fermeture et de barrage de 1'extr6mit6 sud de la rue Water (recommandation figurant au rapport) 5.3 Lotissement du croissant Hitachi — entreprise Galbraith Construction Limited (recommandation figurant au rapport) 5.4 Soumission relative a 18 appareils respiratoires autonomes a bouteille d'air pulmo- command6 Scott et accessoires pour le Service d'incendie de Saint John (recommandation au rapport) 5.5 Soumission relative aux socs de charrue et aux bords (recommandation figurant au rapport) 5.6 Travaux de pose d'enduit superficiel en 2011 (recommandation figurant au rapport) 5.7 Calfeutrage des fissures pour 2011 (recommandation figurant au rapport) 5.8 Avenue Millidge, cour Skaling, avenue Woodward et rue Black — s6paration des 6gouts pluviaux (recommandation figurant au rapport) 5.9 Accord de confidentialit6 relatif a 1'entente de vente (entente de non - divulgation) entre la Ville et Taleo (recommandation figurant au rapport) 5.10 Demande de pr6sentation de la part du Compte fiduciaire d'6ducation m6dicale du Nouveau - Brunswick (recommandation : transmettre au greffier pour qu'une date de pr6sentation soit fix6e) 6. Commentaires presentee par les membres 7. Proclamation 7.1 Centraide — le jeudi ler septembre 2011 7.2 Mois des « Gens de mer » — septembre 2011 7.3 Mois de sensibilisation a 1'arthrite — septembre 2011 8. Delegations et presentations 9. Audiences publiques 19h 9.1(a) Projet de modification de 1'Arr&6 de zonage visant le 192 -194, rue St James Ouest 9. lb) Rapport du Comit6 consultatif d'urbanisme recommandant le rezonage conform6ment aux conditions impos6es par Particle 39 9.2(a) Projet de modification de 1'Arret6 de zonage visant le 1035, chemin Burchill 9.2(b) Rapport du Comit6 consultatif d'urbanisme recommandant le rezonage conform6ment aux conditions impos6es par Particle 39 10. Etude des arret6s municipaux 10.1 Troisi&me lecture de la proposition d'abrogation de 1'Arret6 sur les batiments endommag6s par le feu 10.2 Pr6sentation publique relative a la modification propos6e du plan municipal visant le 109 -113, rue Prince Edward et 27, rue Richmond 11. Interventions des membres du conseil 11.0 Activit& artistique a la craie et musiciens ambulants dans les rues municipales (maire Court) 11.1 Terrains disponibles aux fins d'am6nagement (conseiller Sullivan) 11.2 Archives des motions (conseiller Farren) 11.3 Etude d'impact sur 1'environnement concernant la proposition relative a une ligne 6lectrique dans le quartier ouest (conseiller McGuire) 11.4 Lieux inesth6tiques de Saint John Ouest (conseiller McGuire) 12. Affaires municipales &oqukes par les fonctionnaires municipaux 12.1 Directeur g6n&ral : Incidences de la circulation — Tim Hortons, 222, promenade Bayside 12.2 Directeur g6n6ral : Municipalit6 de Saint John — r6gime d'investissement de quatre ans conforme a N< entente sur le transfert des revenus provenant de la taxe sur 1'essence » (2010 -2013) 12.3 Commissaire aux finances: Financement des immobilisations 12.4 Directeur g6n6ral : S6paration des 6gouts pluviaux de Milford — Phase 1 13. Rapports d6pos6s par les comit6s 13.1 Comit6 consultatif d'urbanisme : Demande de personnel municipal suppl6mentaire pendant les r6unions du Comit6 consultatif d'urbanisme 14. Etude des sujets 6cart6s des questions soumises i 1'approbation du conseil 15. Correspondance gknkrale 15.1 Conseil de conservation du Nouveau - Brunswick et Friends of Rockwood Park: Restauration du 1671, chemin Sandy Point 16. Lev& de la s6ance 96 -315 COMMON COUNCIL / CONSEIL COMMUNAL AUGUST 2, 201 VLE 2 AOUT 2011 COMMON COUNCIL MEETING — THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN CITY HALL — AUGUST 2, 2011 - 7:00 P.M. Present: Ivan Court, Mayor Deputy Mayor Chase and Councillors Court, Farren, Higgins, McGuire, Mott, Norton, Snook, Sullivan, and Titus -and - K. Forrest, Commissioner of Planning and Development / Acting City Manager; M. Tompkins, Solicitor; G. Yeomans, Commissioner of Finance and Treasurer; P. Groody, Commissioner of Municipal Operations; A. Poffenroth, Deputy Commissioner of Buildings and Inspection Services; W. Edwards, Commissioner of Buildings and Inspection Services; M. King, Police Staff Sargeant; K. Clifford, Acting Fire Chief; E. Gormley, Common Clerk and J. Taylor, Assistant Common Clerk. SEANCE DU CONSEIL COMMUNAL DE THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN TENUE A L'HOTEL DE VILLE, LE 2 AOUT 2011 A 19 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 - K. Forrest, commissaire au service Urbanisme et developpement /directeur general par interim; M. Tompkins, avocat; G. Yeomans, commissaire aux finances et tresorier; P. Groody, commissaire aux Operations municipales; A. Poffenroth, commissaire adjoint aux Services d'inspection et des batiments; W. Edwards, commissaire aux Services d'inspection et des batiments; M. King, sergent d'etat -major du Service de police; K. Clifford, chef du service d'incendie par interim; E. Gormley, greffiere communale, et J. Taylor, greffier communal adjoint. 1. Call To Order — Prayer Mayor Court called the meeting to order and Councillor Snook offered the opening prayer. 1. Ouverture de la seance, suivie de la priere La seance est ouverte par le maire Court, et le conseiller Snook recite la priere d'ouverture. 2. Approval of Minutes On motion of Councillor Titus Seconded by Councillor Sullivan RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting of Common Council, held on July 18, 2011, be tabled until the meeting of August 15, 2011. Question being taken, the motion was carried. 2. Approbation du proces- verbal Proposition du conseiller Titus Appuyee par le conseiller Sullivan RESOLU que le proces- verbal de la seance du conseil communal tenue le 18 juillet 2011 soit reporte jusqu'a la tenue de la reunion du 15 aout 2011. A I'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. 7 96 -316 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL AUGUST 2, 201 VLE 2 AOUT 2011 3. Approval of Agenda On motion of Councillor Titus Seconded by Councillor Snook RESOLVED that the agenda of this meeting be approved, with the addition of items: 5.18 Harbour Clean -Up Marsh Creek Collector Sewer and Forcemain Installation Project Pipe Crossings Under CN Tracks; 13.2 Committee of the Whole: Outstanding Contributions re: Pension Plan Going Concern Unfunded Liability; 13.3 Committee of the Whole: Appointment of Acting Fire Chief; 13.4 Committee of the Whole: Interim Arrangements for Acting City Manager; and further that items 12.3 City Manager: Solid Waste Management Service — Outsource Decision and 12.4 City Manager: Wellfield Protection — Harbourview Subdivision be withdrawn from the agenda and added to the agenda of August 29, 2011. Question being taken, the motion was carried. 3. Adoption de I'ordre du jour Proposition du conseiller Titus Appuyee par le conseiller Snook RESOLU que I'ordre du jour de la presente reunion soit adopte, moyennant I'ajout des points suivants : 5.18 Projet lie a ('installation d'une conduite de refoulement et d'un egout collecteur au ruisseau Marsh dans le cadre du nettoyage du port — Passage de conduits sous les lignes de chemin de fer du CN; 13.2 Comite plenier : Contributions impayees — Passif a long terme non capitalise du regime de retraite; 13.3 Comite plenier : Nomination d'un chef du service d'incendie par interim; 13.4 Comite plenier : Arrangements provisoires au sujet du directeur general par interim, et, de plus, que les points 12.3 Directeur general : Service de gestion des dechets solides — Decision liee a I'impartition et 12.4 Directeur general : Protection des champs de captage — Lotissement Harbourview soient retires de I'ordre du jour et ajoutes a I'ordre du jour du 29 aout 2011. A I'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. 4. Disclosures of Conflict of Interest Mayor Court declared a conflict of interest with item 9.4 and he declared a possible bias for item 9.3; Councillors Norton and Court declared a conflict with items 9.3 and 9.4 respectively. 4. Divulgations de conflits d'interets Le maire Court declare un conflit d'interets avec le point 9.4 et un parti pris possible a 1'egard du point 9.3; les conseillers Norton et Court declarent titre en conflit d'interets avec les points 9.3 et 9.4 respectivement. 9. Public Hearings 7:00 P.M. 9.1(a) Proposed Section 39 Amendment— 350 Ashburn Road 9.1(b) Planning Advisory Committee Recommending Section 39 Amendment 9.1(c) Letters of Opposition The Common Clerk advised that the necessary advertising was completed with regard to amending the Section 39 conditions imposed on the March 22, 2004 rezoning of the property located at 350 Ashburn Road, also identified as PID number 55116073, to permit a trailer or mobile home sales lot, as well as additional commercial or light industrial uses, on the property. Consideration was also given to a report from the Planning Advisory Committee submitting a copy of Planning Staff's report considered at its July 19th, 2011 meeting at which the Committee recommended the proposed Section 39 Amendment. The Mayor called for members of the public to speak against the amendment with Joanne Middleton of Ashburn Road raising concerns with respect to flooding, stormwater management and the transition of land uses in the area from residential to commercial. 96 -317 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL AUGUST 2, 201 VLE 2 AOUT 2011 The Mayor called for members of the public to speak in favour of the amendment with Rick Turner of Hughes Surveys andConsultants, representing the applicant, stating that he was in agreement with the staff report and recommendation. He explained that Council's stormwater by -law would act as a safeguard for stormwater management in the area. He further noted that the developer intends to remove the clay from the ground on the subject site and replace it with shale rock to improve drainage. On motion of Councillor Court Seconded by Councillor Higgins RESOLVED that Council deny the proposed Section 39 amendment for 350 Ashburn Rd. Question being taken, the motion was defeated with the Mayor, the Deputy Mayor and Councillors Farren, McGuire, Mott, Snook, Sullivan and Titus voting nay. On motion of Councillor Titus Seconded by Councillor McGuire RESOLVED that Common Council amend the Section 39 conditions imposed on the March 22, 2004 rezoning of the property located at 350 Ashburn Road, also identified as PID number 55116073 as follows: 1) Condition "a)" is deleted and replaced with the following: a) The use of the rezoned area is limited to a retail home sales lot and a trailer or mobile home sales lot. 2) Condition "b)" is deleted and replaced with the following: b) The developer must pave all parking areas, manoeuvring areas, loading areas and driveways with asphalt. All paved areas must be enclosed with continuous cast -in place concrete curbs in order to protect the landscaped areas and facilitate proper drainage. Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors Court and Higgins voting nay. 9. Audiences publiques a 19 h 9.1a) Modification proposee a I'article 39-350, chemin Ashburn 9.1 b) Recommandations du Comite consultatif d'urbanisme en faveur de la modification des dispositions de I'article 39 9.1c) Lettres d'opposition La greffiere communale indique que les avis requis ont ete publies en ce qui a trait a la modification des conditions imposees par I'article 39, le 22 mars 2004, relativement au rezonage de la propriete situee au 350, chemin Ashburn, inscrite sous le NID 55116073, afin de permettre 1'exploitation d'un terrain de vente de roulottes ou de maisons mobiles, ainsi que des usages commerciaux ou d'industrie Iegere sur la propriete. On procede egalement a 1'examen d'un rapport du Comite consultatif d'urbanisme, accompagne d'un exemplaire du rapport du personnel d'urbanisme, etudie lors de la seance du 19 juillet 2011, pendant laquelle le Comite a recommande la modification proposee a I'article 39. Le maire invite les membres du public a exprimer leur opposition quant a la modification. Joanne Middleton, residente du chemin Ashburn, fait part de ses inquietudes concernant la gestion des inondations et des eaux pluviales, ainsi qu'au sujet du passage de ('usage residentiel a ('usage commercial du terrain dans le secteur. Le maire invite les membres du public a exprimer leur appui quant a la modification. Rick Turner, de Hughes Surveys and Consultants, qui represente le demandeur, se prononce en faveur des recommandations et du rapport du personnel. II explique que I'arrete du conseil relatif aux eaux pluviales pourrait servir de garantie pour la gestion des eaux pluviales dans le secteur. II ajoute que le promoteur prevoit retirer I'argile du sol sur le site en question et de la remplacer par des schistes rocheux afin d'ameliorer le drainage. 9 96 -318 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL AUGUST 2, 201 VLE 2 AOUT 2011 Proposition du conseiller Court Appuyee par la conseillere Higgins RESOLU que le conseil refuse la modification proposee a I'article 39 concernant le 350, chemin Ashburn. A I'issue du vote, la proposition est rejetee. Le maire, le maire suppleant ainsi que les conseillers Farren, McGuire, Mott, Snook, Sullivan et Titus votent contre la proposition. Proposition du conseiller Titus Appuyee par le conseiller McGuire RESOLU que le conseil communal procede a la modification des conditions imposees par I'article 39, le 22 mars 2004, relativement au rezonage de la propriete situee au 350, chemin Ashburn et portant le NID 55116073, comme suit: 1) La condition « a) » est supprimee et remplacee par le Iibelle suivant a) ('usage du secteur rezone se limite au terrain de vente de maisons au detail et au terrain de vente de roulottes ou de maisons mobiles. 2) La condition « b) » est supprimee et remplacee par le Iibelle suivant : b) Le promoteur doit revetir d'asphalte toutes les aires de stationnement, de manoeuvre et de chargement, ainsi que les voies d'acces. Toutes les aires asphaltees doivent etre entourees de bordures continues de beton coulees sur place pour proteger les espaces paysagers et faciliter le drainage. A I'issue du vote, la proposition est acceptee. Le conseiller Court et la conseillere Higgins votent contre la proposition. 9.2 (a) Proposed Zoning By -Law Amendment 303 Westmorland Rd 9.2(b) Planning Advisory Committee Report Recommending Denial of Zoning By -Law Amendment The Common Clerk advised that the necessary advertising was completed with regard to amending Schedule "A ", the Zoning Map of The City of Saint John, by re- zoning a parcel of land located at 303 Westmorland Rd, having an area of approximately 3900 square metres, also identified as PID number 00321158 from "IL -1" Neighbourhood Institutional to "B -2" General Business, with written objections being received. Consideration was also given to a report from the Planning Advisory Committee submitting a copy of Planning Staff's report considered at its July 19th, 2011 meeting at which time the Committee recommended that the application for re- zoning be denied. The Mayor called for members of the public to speak against the amendment with no one presenting. The Mayor called for members of the public to speak in favour of the amendment with James Bustard, Carol Liebel, and John Maurer appearing before Council expressing support for the proposed rezoning. Councillor McGuire stated that he is against the rezoning as he would like to see the area preserved as residential. Councillor Mott stated that he is concerned about the increased traffic that the business would generate. Councillor Sullivan expressed concerns with spot rezoning in a residential neighbourhood. On motion of CouncillorTitus Seconded by Councillor Snook RESOLVED that the by -law entitled "A Law to Amend the Zoning By -Law of The City of Saint John" amending Schedule "A ", the Zoning Map of The City of Saint John, by re- zoning a parcel of land located at 303 Westmorland Rd, having an area of approximately 3900 square metres, also identified as PID number 00321158 from "IL -1" Neighbourhood Institutional to "B -2" General Business, be read a first time. 10 96 -319 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL AUGUST 2, 201 VLE 2 AOUT 2011 Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors McGuire, Mott and Sullivan voting nay. Read a first time by title, the by -law entitled "A Law to Amend the Zoning By -Law of The City of Saint John." On motion of Councillor Titus Seconded by Councillor Snook RESOLVED that the by -law entitled "A Law to Amend the Zoning By -Law of The City of Saint John" amending Schedule "A ", the Zoning Map of The City of Saint John, by re- zoning a parcel of land located at 303 Westmorland Rd, having an area of approximately 3900 square metres, also identified as PID number 00321158 from "IL -1" Neighbourhood Institutional to "B -2" General Business, be read a second time; and further that staff be directed to prepare the appropriate section 39 conditions with respect to the subject property. Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors McGuire, Mott and Sullivan voting nay. Read a second time by title, the by -law entitled "A Law to Amend the Zoning By -Law of The City of Saint John." 9.2a) Projet de modification de I'Arrete de zonage visant le 303, chemin Westmorland 9.2b) Rapport du Comite consultatif d'urbanisme recommandant le rejet de la modification de I'Arrete de zonage La greffiere communale indique que les avis requis ont ete publies relativement a la modification de I'annexe « A », plan de zonage de The City of Saint John, en vue du rezonage d'une parcelle de terrain d'une superficie d'environ 3 900 metres carres situee au 303, chemin Westmorland, inscrite sous le NID 00321158, afin de faire passer la classification s'y rapportant de zone de quartier a vocation collective « IL -1 » a zone commerciale generale « B -2 » et que des objections par ecrit ont ete regues a cet egard. On procede egalement a 1'examen d'un rapport du Comite consultatif d'urbanisme, accompagne d'un exemplaire du rapport du personnel d'urbanisme, etudie lors de la seance du 19 juillet 2011, date a laquelle le comite a recommande que la demande de rezonage soit rejetee. Le maire invite le public a exprimer son opposition quant a la modification, mais personne ne prend la parole. Le maire invite les membres du public a exprimer leur appui quant a la modification. James Bustard, Carol Liebel et John Maurer se presentent devant le conseil et se prononcent en faveur du projet de rezonage. Le conseiller McGuire indique qu'il est oppose au rezonage, car it aimerait que la zone soit preservee comme secteur residentiel. Le conseiller Mott indique que I'augmentation de la circulation qui serait generae par le commerce le preoccupe. Le conseiller Sullivan exprime ses inquietudes a I'egard du rezonage ponctuel dans un quartier residentiel. Proposition du conseiller Titus Appuyee par le conseiller Snook RESOLU que I'arrete intitule « Arrete modifiant I'Arrete de zonage de The City of Saint John » modifiant I'annexe « A », plan de zonage de The City of Saint John, en vue du rezonage d'une parcelle de terrain situee au 303, chemin Westmorland, d'une superficie d'environ 3 900 metres carres, inscrite sous le NID 00321158, afin de faire passer la designation de zone de quartier a vocation collective « IL -1 » a zone commerciale generale « B -2 », fasse I'objet d'une premiere lecture. A I'issue du vote, la proposition est acceptee. Les conseillers McGuire, Mott et Sullivan votent contre la proposition. 11 96 -320 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL AUGUST 2, 201 VLE 2 AOUT 2011 Premiere lecture par titre de 1'arrete intitule « Arrete modifiant I'Arrete de zonage de The City of Saint John ». Proposition du conseiller Titus Appuyee par le conseiller Snook RESOLLI que I'arrete intitule « Arrete modifiant I'Arrete de zonage de The City of Saint John » modifiant I'annexe « A », plan de zonage de The City of Saint John, en vue du rezonage d'une parcelle de terrain situee au 303, chemin Westmorland, d'une superficie d'environ 3 900 metres carres, inscrite sous le NID 00321158, afin de faire passer la designation de zone de quartier a vocation collective « IL -1 » a zone commerciale generale « B -2 », fasse ('objet d'une deuxieme lecture et, de plus, que le personnel soit charge de rediger les conditions appropriees en vertu de I'article 39 relativement au terrain en question. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est acceptee. Les conseillers McGuire, Mott et Sullivan votent contre la proposition. Deuxieme lecture par titre de 1'arrete intitule « Arrete modifiant I'Arrete de zonage de The City of Saint John ». 9.3(a) Proposed Zoning By -Law Amendment 50 Heather Way 9.3(b) Planning Advisory Committee Report Recommending Denial of Zoning By -Law Amendment 9.3(c) Letters of Opposition and Support (Councillor Norton withdrew from the meeting) The Common Clerk advised that the necessary advertising was completed with regard to the proposed amendment to the Zoning By -Law for a parcel of land located at 50 Heather Way, having an area of approximately 7.5 hectares, also identified as PID numbers 55124358, 55190227 and a portion of PID numbers 00456640, 00456657 and 00456665 from "R -2" One and Two Family Residential to "MH" Mobile Home Park, with letters of objection and one letter of support received. Consideration was also given to a report from the Planning Advisory Committee submitting a copy of Planning Staff's report considered at its July 19th, 2011 meeting at which the Committee recommended that the application for re- zoning be denied. The Mayor called for members of the public to speak against the re- zoning and the following citizens appeared before Council: Margaret Dubee of Grandview Avenue; James MacLellan of Grandview Avenue; Adam MacDonald of Boyaner Crescent; Wayne Stephen of Grandview Avenue; Joseph Marriott; Stephen Wayne; Eric Daley of Wyatt Crescent; Rick McGinley of Wyatt Crescent; Lee Miller of Grandview Avenue; Barbara Burns of Grandview Avenue; Leanne Shannon of Boyaner Crescent; JP Quinn of Boyaner Crescent and Kelly VanBuskirk speaking on behalf of Dianne Wilson. Some of the concerns that were expressed included: the proposed development not being compatible with the neighbourhood and / or the direction of PlanSJ; the potential of decreased property values; the proposed berms; increases in traffic; lack of street parking; lack of playgrounds; storm drainage issues; removal of trees; blasting; snow removal; the size of the proposed lots / high density; the notion that the proposal would have transient people and would not contribute to a stable community; the absence of a property manager in the development; emergency vehicle accessibility on the proposed streets. (Councillor Mott withdrew from a portion of the public hearing) The Mayor called for members of the public to speak in favour of the re- zoning with the developer, Bob Darling of North Star Holdings Ltd., speaking in favour of the application and staff recommendation. He explained that the staff report addressed each of the issues raised by area residents with the exception of the lack of nearby playgrounds, noting that he would agree to donate land for the construction of a new playground. He stated that his proposal is an affordable housing option, noting that the price of the homes in this development would be approximately $60,000 less expensive than any other newly constructed homes. Mr. Forrest displayed pictures of other comparable mini home developments in New Brunswick and he responded to questions from Council members. 12 96 -321 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL AUGUST 2, 201 VLE 2 AOUT 2011 On motion of Councillor Titus Seconded by Councillor McGuire RESOLVED that the meeting time be extended beyond 10:00 p.m. as provided for in the Procedural By -law. Question being take, the motion was carried. Responding to a question, K. Clifford, Acting Fire Chief, stated that the Fire Department typically provides input to planning staff when contacted about proposed developments. He advised that he has not reviewed the present application, noting that the Fire Department would be concerned with emergency vehicle turning radius and accessibility. The Common Clerk advised that Councillor Mott withdrew for a portion of the public hearing. The Mayor suggested that Councillor Mott withdraw for the remainder of the item due to his absence from a large portion of the public hearing. (Councillor Mott withdrew from the meeting) On motion of Councillor Titus Seconded by Councillor McGuire RESOLVED that the proposed amendment to the Zoning By -Law for a parcel of land located at 50 Heather Way, having an area of approximately 7.5 hectares, also identified as PID numbers 55124358, 55190227and a portion of PID numbers 00456640, 00456657 and 00456665 from "R -2" One and Two Family Residential to "MH" Mobile Home Park, be read a first time. The Mayor did not vote on the motion citing a possible bias with respect to the proposed rezoning. Question being taken, the motion was defeated with Deputy Mayor Chase and Councillors Court, Farren, Higgins and Snook voting nay. On motion of Councillor Titus Seconded by Councillor Court RESOLVED that the proposed amendment to the Zoning By -Law for a parcel of land located at 50 Heather Way, having an area of approximately 7.5 hectares, also identified as PID numbers 55124358, 55190227 and a portion of PID numbers 00456640, 00456657 and 00456665 from "R -2" One and Two Family Residential to "MH" Mobile Home Park, be denied. The Mayor did not vote on the motion citing a possible bias with respect to the proposed rezoning. Question being taken, the motion was carried. (Councillor Mott re- entered the meeting) 9.3a) Projet de modification de I'Arrete de zonage visant le 50, voie Heather 9.3b) Rapport du Comite consultatif d'urbanisme recommandant le rejet de la modification de I'Arrete de zonage 9.3c) Lettres d'opposition et d'appui (Le conseiller Norton quitte la seance.) La greffiere communale indique que les avis requis ont ete publies relativement au projet de modification de I'Arrete de zonage visant la parcelle de terrain situee au 50, voie Heather, d'une superficie approximative de 7,5 hectares, inscrite sous les NID 55124358, 55190227 et etant une portion des NID 00456640, 00456657 et 00456665, pour passer de zone residentielle — habitations unifamiliales et bifamiliales « R -2 » a zone parc de maisons mobiles « MH », et que des lettres d'opposition et une lettre d'appui ont ete reques. On procede egalement a 1'examen d'un rapport du Comite consultatif d'urbanisme, accompagne d'un exemplaire du rapport du personnel d'urbanisme, etudie lors de la seance du 19 juillet 2011, date a Iaquelle le comite a recommande que la demande de rezonage soit rejetee. 13 96 -322 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL AUGUST 2, 201 VLE 2 AOUT 2011 Le maire invite le public a se prononcer contre le rezonage et les citoyens suivants se presentent devant le conseil : Margaret Dubee de ('avenue Grandview; James MacLellan de ('avenue Grandview; Adam MacDonald du croissant Boyaner; Wayne Stephen de ('avenue Grandview; Joseph Marriott; Stephen Wayne; Eric Daley du croissant Wyatt; Rick McGinley du croissant Wyatt; Lee Miller de ('avenue Grandview; Barbara Burns de ('avenue Grandview; Leanne Shannon du croissant Boyaner; JP Quinn du croissant Boyaner et Kelly VanBuskirk, au nom de Dianne Wilson. Certaines des preoccupations exprimees sont notamment les suivantes : incompatibilite du projet de developpement avec le quartier ou ('orientation du PlanSJ; possibilite d'une baisse des valeurs foncieres; projet de creation de bermes; augmentation de la circulation, manque d'espaces de stationnement sur rue; manque de terrains de jeu; problemes relatifs au drainage pluvial; retrait d'arbres; dynamitage; deneigement; superficie des lots proposes /haute densite; idee selon laquelle le projet genererait la venue de personnes de passage et ne contribuerait donc pas a creer une collectivite stable; absence de gestionnaire immobilier participant a I'amenagement; accessibilite des vehicules d'urgence dans les rues proposees. (Le conseiller Mott quitte I'audience publique pour un certain temps.) Le maire invite les membres du public a exprimer leur appui quant au rezonage. Le promoteur, Bob Darling de North Star Holdings Ltd., se prononce en faveur de la demande et de la recommandation emise par le personnel. II explique que le rapport du personnel a aborde chaque question soulevee par les residents du quartier, a 1'exception de la question relative au manque de terrains de jeu dans les environs, en mentionnant qu'il accepterait de faire don d'un terrain pour la construction d'un nouveau terrain de jeu. 11 indique que sa proposition est une possibilite de Iogement abordable, en faisant remarquer que le prix des maisons dans cet amenagement couterait environ 60 000 dollars de moins que les autres maisons recemment construites. M. Forrest montre les photos d'autres amenagements de mini - maisons comparables au Nouveau - Brunswick et repond aux questions des membres du conseil. Proposition du conseiller Titus Appuyee par le conseiller McGuire RESOLLI que la reunion se prolonge au -dela de 22 h, conformement aux dispositions de 1'arrete procedural. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. En reponse a une question, K. Clifford, chef du service d'incendie par interim, declare que le service d'incendie fait habituellement part de ses points de vue au personnel d'urbanisme lorsque I'on communique avec lui concernant des amenagements proposes. II signale qu'il n'a pas examine la presente demande, indiquant que le service d'incendie serait preoccupe par le rayon de virage et I'accessibilite des vehicules d'urgence. La greffiere communale signale que le conseiller Mott a quitte I'audience publique pour un certain temps. Le maire propose que le conseiller Mott se retire jusqu'a la fin du point, compte tenu de son absence pendant une grande partie de I'audience publique. (Le conseiller Mott quitte la seance.) Proposition du conseiller Titus Appuyee par le conseiller McGuire RESOLLI que le projet de modification de I'Arrete de zonage visant la parcelle de terrain situee au 50, voie Heather, d'une superficie approximative de 7,5 hectares, et inscrite sous les NID 55124358, 55190227 et etant une portion des NID 00456640, 00456657 et 00456665, pour passer de zone residentielle — habitations unifamiliales et bifamiliales « R -2 » a zone parc de maisons mobiles « MH », fasse ('objet d'une premiere lecture. Le maire ne procede pas a la mise aux voix de la motion, invoquant un parti pris possible par rapport au rezonage propose. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est rejetee. Le maire suppleant Chase ainsi que les conseillers Court, Farren, Snook et la conseillere Higgins votent contre la proposition. 14 96 -323 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL AUGUST 2, 201 VLE 2 AOUT 2011 Proposition du conseiller Titus Appuyee par le conseiller Court RESOLU que le projet de modification de I'Arrete de zonage visant la parcelle de terrain situee au 50, voie Heather, d'une superficie approximative de 7,5 hectares, et inscrite sous les NID 55124358, 55190227 et etant une portion des NID 00456640, 00456657 et 00456665, pour passer de zone residentielle — habitations unifamiliales et bifamiliales « R -2 » a zone parc de maisons mobiles « MH », soit rejete. Le maire ne procede pas a la mise aux voix de la motion, invoquant un parti pris possible par rapport au rezonage propose. A Tissue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. (Le conseiller Mott se joint de nouveau a la seance.) On motion of Councillor Titus Seconded by Councillor McGuire RESOLVED that items 11.1 Acquiring Land from Brunswick Pipeline (Councillor Farren) and 12.1 City Manager: Emera Brunswick Pipeline Company Ltd., be moved forward on the agenda. Question being taken, the motion was carried. Proposition du conseiller Titus Appuyee par le conseiller McGuire RESOLU que les points 11.1 Acquisition de biens- fonds appartenant a Brunswick Pipeline (conseiller Farren) et 12.1 Directeur general Emera Brunswick Pipeline Company Ltd., soient avances dans I'ordre du jour. A Tissue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. 12. Business Matters- Municipal Officers 12.1 City Manager: Emera Brunswick Pipeline Company Ltd. On motion of Councillor Titus Seconded by Councillor McGuire RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager in the submitted report Emera Brunswick Pipeline Company Ltd., the City graciously accept the transfer of land, being PID #405431, from Emera Brunswick Pipeline Company Ltd. (reserving to them an easement for their infrastructure) and that the Commissioner of Finance issue to the Company an official municipal donation receipt for income tax purposes for the value of the gift. Question being taken, the motion was carried. Proposition du conseiller Titus Appuyee par le conseiller McGuire RESOLU que les points 11.1 Acquisition de biens- fonds appartenant a Brunswick Pipeline (conseiller Farren) et 12.1 Directeur general Emera Brunswick Pipeline Company Ltd., soient avances dans I'ordre du jour. A Tissue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. 12. Affaires municipales evoquees par les fonctionnaires municipaux 12.1 Directeur general : Emera Brunswick Pipeline Company Ltd. Proposition du conseiller Titus Appuyee par le conseiller McGuire RESOLU que, comme le recommande le directeur general dans le rapport soumis intitule Emera Brunswick Pipeline Company Ltd., la Ville accepte gracieusement le transfert du terrain portant le NID 40543, de 1'entreprise Emera Brunswick Pipeline Company Ltd. (lui reservant une servitude pour son 15 96 -324 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL AUGUST 2, 2011/LE 2 AO(JT 2011 infrastructure) et que le commissaire aux finances emette, a l'intention de 1'entreprise, un regu officiel aux fins de I'impot sur le revenu en reconnaissance d'un don offert a la municipalite mentionnant la valeur du don. A Tissue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. 16 96 -325 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL AUGUST 2, 201 VLE 2 AOUT 2011 9.4(a,b) Proposed Municipal Plan & Zoning By -Law Amendment - Sandy Point Road 9.4(c) Planning Advisory Committee Report Recommending Zoning By -Law Amendment 9.4(d) Letters of Opposition and Support (Councillor Norton re- entered the meeting) (Mayor Court and Councillor Court withdrew from the meeting) Deputy Mayor Chase replaced the Mayor as Chair of the meeting. The Common Clerk advised that the necessary advertising was completed with regard to the proposed Municipal Plan and Zoning By -Law amendments for parcels of land located to the Southeast of Sandy Point Road, between University Avenue and the Cherry Brook Zoo, and a parcel of land located between Sandy Point Road and Samuel Davis Drive, also identified as portions of PID numbers 00418129, 55059026, 55059034, 55196380 and 00052548, by redesignating on Schedule 2 -A of the Municipal Development Plan, from Low Density Residential to Open Space; and rezoning same from "R -1 A" One Family Residential and "RS -2" One and Two Family Suburban Residential to "P -2" Park, with letters of objection and support received. Consideration was also given to a report from the Planning Advisory Committee submitting a copy of Planning Staff's report considered at its July 19th, 2011 meeting at which the Committee decided to recommend approval as set out in the staff recommendation to re -zone parcels of land located on Sandy Point Road, as described above. The Deputy Mayor called for members of the public to speak against the Municipal Plan and Zoning amendments with no one presenting. The Deputy Mayor called for members of the public to speak in favour of the Municipal Plan and Zoning amendments with Atsko Nose of Sandy Point Road, Monica Chaperlin of Sandy Point Road, Ernestine Rooney of Sandy Point Road, Peggy Campbell of Brentwood Crescent, David Thompson, and Dr. Darrell Gallant of Sandy Point Road, expressing support for the proposed amendments. Some of the speakers expressed a desire for the remediation of the land of 1671 Sandy Point Road and Howes Lake. Responding to a question, Ms. Tompkins stated that if Council chooses to set the boundaries of Rockwood Park by resolution, it could later decide to change those boundaries as it owns the land. Councillors McGuire and Titus indicated that they do not support the proposed rezoning of the property as Council did not establish a public hearing for the subject property when staff made zoning recommendations in the Sandy Point Road Planning Study. On motion of Councillor Farren Seconded by Councillor McGuire RESOLVED that the by -law entitled "A Law to Amend the Municipal Plan By -Law" amending Schedule 2 -A, the Future Land Use Plan, by re- designating parcels of land located to the Southeast of Sandy Point Road, between University Avenue and the Cherry Brook Zoo, and a parcel of land located between Sandy Point Road and Samuel Davis Drive, also identified as portions of PID numbers 00418129, 55059026, 55059034, 55196380 and 00052548, from Low Density Residential to Open Space, to permit a park, be read a first time. Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors McGuire and Titus voting nay. Read a first time by title, the by -law entitled "A Law to Amend the Municipal Plan By- Law." On motion of Councillor Titus Seconded by Councillor McGuire RESOLVED that the by -law entitled "A Law to Amend the Municipal Plan By -Law" amending Schedule 2 -A, the Future Land Use Plan, by re- designating parcels of land located to the Southeast of Sandy Point Road, 17 96 -326 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL AUGUST 2, 201 VLE 2 AOUT 2011 between University Avenue and the Cherry Brook Zoo, and a parcel of land located between Sandy Point Road and Samuel Davis Drive, also identified as portions of PID numbers 00418129, 55059026, 55059034, 55196380 and 00052548, from Low Density Residential to Open Space, to permit a park, be read a second time. Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors McGuire and Titus voting nay. Read a second time by title, the by -law entitled "A Law to Amend the Municipal Plan By- Law." On motion of Councillor Titus Seconded by Councillor Sullivan RESOLVED that the by -law entitled "A Law to Amend the Zoning By -Law of The City of Saint John" amending Section 30(1) to include "P -2" Park; adding Section 731 regarding the acceptable uses and zoning standards for lands designated P -2; and re- zoning parcels of land located to the Southeast of Sandy Point Road, between University Avenue and the Cherry Brook Zoo, and a parcel of land located between Sandy Point Road and Samuel Davis Drive, also identified as portions of PID numbers 00418129, 55059026, 55059034, 55196380 and 00052548, from "R -1A" One Family Residential and "RS -2" One and Two Family Suburban Residential to "P -2" Park, be read a first time. Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors McGuire and Titus voting nay. Read a first time by title, the by -law entitiled " A Law to Amend the Zoning By -Law of The City of Saint John." On motion of Councillor Titus Seconded by Councillor McGuire RESOLVED that the by -law entitled "A Law to Amend the Zoning By -Law of The City of Saint John" amending Section 30(1) to include "P -2" Park; adding Section 731 regarding the acceptable uses and zoning standards for lands designated P -2; and re- zoning parcels of land located to the Southeast of Sandy Point Road, between University Avenue and the Cherry Brook Zoo, and a parcel of land located between Sandy Point Road and Samuel Davis Drive, also identified as portions of PID numbers 00418129, 55059026, 55059034, 55196380 and 00052548, from "R -1A" One Family Residential and "RS -2" One and Two Family Suburban Residential to "P -2" Park, be read a second time. Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors McGuire and Titus voting nay. Read a second time by title, the by -law entitiled " A Law to Amend the Zoning By -Law of The City of Saint John." (Mayor Court and Councillor Court re- entered the meeting) The Mayor replaced the Deputy Mayor as Chair of the meeting. 9.4a), b) Projet de modification du plan municipal et de I'Arrete de zonage visant le chemin Sandy Point 9.4c) Rapport du Comite consultatif d'urbanisme recommandant la modification de I'Arrete de zonage 9.4d) Lettres d'opposition et d'appui (Le conseiller Norton reintegre la seance.) (Le maire Court et le conseiller Court quittent la reunion.) Le maire suppleant Chase remplace le maire a titre de president de la reunion. La greffiere communale indique que les avis requis ont ete publies relativement au projet de modification du plan municipal et de I'Arrete de zonage relativement aux parcelles de terrain situees au sud -est du chemin Sandy Point, entre I'avenue University et le zoo Cherry Brook, et a une parcelle de terrain situee entre le chemin Sandy Point et la promenade Samuel Davis, inscrites sous les NID 00418129, 55059026, 55059034, 55196380 et 00052548 afin de faire passer la designation a I'annexe 2 -A du plan in 96 -327 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL AUGUST 2, 2011/LE 2 AOUT 2011 d'amenagement municipal, de zone residentielle a faible densite a zone d'espaces libres; en faisant passer le terrain de zone residentielle — habitations unifamiliales o R -1A » et de zone residentielle — habitations unifamiliales et bifamiliales « RS -2 » a zone de parc « P -2 », et que des lettres d'opposition et d'appui ont ete reques. On procede egalement a 1'examen d'un rapport du Comite consultatif d'urbanisme, accompagne d'un exemplaire du rapport du personnel d'urbanisme, etudie lors de la seance du 19 juillet 2011, date a laquelle le comite a decide de recommander I'adoption de la proposition, comme le souligne la recommandation du personnel, voulant que le conseil communal procede au rezonage des parcelles de terrain situees sur le chemin Sandy Point, comme cela est decrit ci- dessus. Le maire suppleant invite le public a exprimer son opposition a la modification du plan municipal et du zonage, mais personne ne prend la parole. Le maire suppleant invite le public a exprimer son appui quant a la modification du plan municipal et du zonage. Atsko Nose du chemin Sandy Point, Monica Chaperlin du chemin Sandy Point, Ernestine Rooney du chemin Sandy Point, Peggy Campbell du croissant Brentwood, David Thompson et Dr Darrell Gallant du chemin Sandy Point se prononcent en faveur du projet de modification. Certains des intervenants souhaitent que des mesures d'assainissement du terrain situe au 1671, chemin Sandy Point et du lac Howes soient prises. En reponse a une question, Mme Tompkins signale que si le conseil choisit d'etablir les limites du parc Rockwood par resolution, it pourrait decider plus tard de modifier ces limites, puisque le terrain Iui appartient. Les conseillers McGuire et Titus signalent qu'ils n'appuient pas le projet de rezonage de la propriete, etant donne que le conseil n'a pas organise une audience publique portant sur la propriete en question Iorsque le personnel a formule des recommandations en matiere de zonage dans 1'etude de planification du chemin Sandy Point. Proposition du conseiller Farren Appuyee par le conseiller McGuire RESOLU que 1'arrete intitule « Arrete modifiant I'Arrete relatif au plan municipal », modifiant I'annexe 2 -A du plan d'amenagement futur des terres, pour faire passer la designation des parcelles de terrain situees au sud -est du chemin Sandy Point, entre ('avenue University et le zoo Cherry Brook, et une parcelle de terrain situee entre le chemin Sandy Point et la promenade Samuel Davis, toutes ces parcelles etant inscrites sous Ies NID 00418129, 55059026, 55059034, 55196380 et 00052548, de zone residentielle a faible densite a zone d'espaces Iibres, et ce, afin d'amenager un parc, fasse l'objet d'une premiere lecture. A Tissue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. Les conseillers McGuire et Titus votent contre la proposition. Premiere lecture par titre de 1'arrete intitule « Arrete modifiant I'Arrete relatif au plan municipal ». Proposition du conseiller Titus Appuyee par le conseiller McGuire RESOLU que 1'arrete intitule « Arrete modifiant I'Arrete relatif au plan municipal », modifiant I'annexe 2 -A du plan d'amenagement futur des terres, pour faire passer la designation des parcelles de terrain situees au sud -est du chemin Sandy Point, entre ('avenue University et le zoo Cherry Brook, et une parcelle de terrain situee entre le chemin Sandy Point et la promenade Samuel Davis, toutes ces parcelles etant inscrites sous Ies NID 00418129, 55059026, 55059034, 55196380 et 00052548, de zone residentielle a faible densite a zone d'espaces Iibres, et ce, afin d'amenager un parc, fasse ('objet d'une deuxieme lecture. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. Les conseillers McGuire et Titus votent contre la proposition. Deuxieme lecture par titre de 1'arrete intitule « Arrete modifiant I'Arrete relatif au plan municipal ». 19 96 -328 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL AUGUST 2, 201 VLE 2 AOUT 2011 Proposition du conseiller Titus Appuyee par le conseiller Sullivan RESOLU que I'arrete intitule « Arrete modifiant I'Arrete de zonage de The City of Saint John » modifiant I'article 30(1) pour inclure la zone de parc « P -2 »; ajoutant I'article 731 relatif aux usages et aux normes de zonage admissibles concernant les terrains classes zone de parc « P -2 » ; et procedant au rezonage des parcelles de terrain situees au sud -est du chemin Sandy Point, entre ('avenue University et le zoo Cherry Brook, et d'une parcelle de terrain situee entre le chemin Sandy Point et la promenade Samuel Davis, toutes ces parcelles etant inscrites sous les NID 00418129, 55059026, 55059034, 55196380 et 00052548, pour faire passer la designation de ces parcelles de terrain de zone residentielle — habitations unifamiliales « R -1A » et zone residentielle — habitations unifamiliales et bifamiliales RS -2 » a zone de parc « P -2 », fasse ('objet d'une premiere lecture. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. Les conseillers McGuire et Titus votent contre la proposition. Premiere lecture par titre de 1'arrete intitule « Arrete modifiant I'Arrete de zonage de The City of Saint John ». Proposition du conseiller Titus Appuyee par le conseiller McGuire RESOLU que I'arrete intitule « Arrete modifiant I'Arrete de zonage de The City of Saint John » modifiant I'article 30(1) pour inclure la zone de parc « P -2 »; ajoutant I'article 731 relatif aux usages et normes de zonage admissibles concernant les terrains classes zone de parc « P -2 » ; et procedant au rezonage des parcelles de terrain situees au sud -est du chemin Sandy Point, entre ('avenue University et le zoo Cherry Brook, et d'une parcelle de terrain situee entre le chemin Sandy Point et la promenade Samuel Davis, toutes ces parcelles etant inscrites sous les NID 00418129, 55059026, 55059034, 55196380 et 00052548, pour faire passer la designation de ces parcelles de terrain de zone residentielle — habitations unifamiliales « R -1A » et zone residentielle — habitations unifamiliales et bifamiliales RS -2 » a zone de parc « P -2 », fasse ('objet d'une deuxieme lecture. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. Les conseillers McGuire et Titus votent contre la proposition. Deuxieme lecture par titre de 1'arrete intitule « Arrete modifiant I'Arrete de zonage de The City of Saint John ». (Le maire Court et le conseiller Court sont de nouveau presents a la reunion.) Le maire remplace le maire suppleant a titre de president de la reunion. 12.1 City Manager: Emera Brunswick Pipeline Company Ltd. Rob Belliveau, General Manager of Emera Brunswick Pipeline Company Ltd., appeared before Council advising that Emera is pleased to announce the transfer of 26 acres of its waterfront property to The City of Saint John for use as a green space for the Milford community. 12.1 Directeur general : Emera Brunswick Pipeline Company Ltd. Rob Belliveau, directeur general d'Emera Brunswick Pipeline Company Ltd., se presente devant le conseil et signale que 1'entreprise est heureuse d'annoncer le transfert de 26 acres de sa propriete du secteur riverain a la Ville de Saint John afin de servir d'espace vert pour la collectivite de Milford. 4.2 Parking Commission: Designation / Authorization to Lay Information in the Provincial Court of New Brunswick for Violation of the Parking Meter and Traffic By -Laws On motion of Councillor Titus Seconded by Councillor McGuire RESOLVED that Valerie Farrah is hereby designated and authorized to lay informations in the Provincial Court of the Province of New Brunswick for breach of the Saint John Traffic By -Law and the Saint John Parking 20 96 -329 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL AUGUST 2, 201 VLE 2 AOUT 2011 Meter By -Law, and this appointment and authorization shall continue until such time as the appointee ceases to be an employee of The City of Saint John or until it is rescinded by Common Council, whichever comes first. Question being taken, the motion was carried. 4.2 Commission sur le stationnement : Designation /Autorisation concernant le depot des sommations a la Cour provinciale du Nouveau - Brunswick pour les infractions lives aux parcometres et aux arretes sur la circulation Proposition du conseiller Titus Appuyee par le conseiller McGuire RESOLU que Valerie Farrah soit, par les presentes, nommee et autorisee a deposer aupres de la Cour provinciale du Nouveau - Brunswick des denonciations relatives aux infractions commises a 1'encontre de I'Arrete relatif a la circulation dans The City of Saint John et de I'arrete sur les parcometres. Cette nomination et son autorisation correspondante demeureront en vigueur aussi longtemps que cette personne sera employee par The City of Saint John ou jusqu'a ce que sa nomination soit revoquee par le conseil communal, selon la premiere eventualite. A Tissue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. 4.3 Committee of the Whole: Recommended Appointments to Committees On motion of Councillor Titus Seconded by Councillor Snook RESOLVED that as recommended by the Committee of the Whole, having met on July 18, 2011, Common Council makes the following appointments to Committees: Saint John Emergency Management Organization Advisory Committee: to appoint Dan Houghton for a two year term from July 18, 2011 to July 18, 2013. Rockwood Park Advisory Board: to re- appoint Greg Burgess, Steve Langille and John Acker each for a one year term from July 18, 2011 to July 18, 2012; to re- appoint Tom Chesworth for a one year term from August 30, 2011 to August 30, 2012; to appoint Jamie LeMesurier for a one year term from July 18, 2011 to July 18, 2012. Taxicab Advisory Committee: to re- appoint Donald LeBlanc, Gary Williston, Mack Tobias, and Christine Saumure from July 18, 2011 to December 31, 2011. Saint John Board of Police Commissioners: to re- appoint Christopher Waldschutz for a three year term from July 18, 2011 to July 18, 2014. Trade & Convention Centre Oversight Committee: to re- appoint Councillor Sullivan from July 18, 2011 until the end of his current term on Council; to re- appoint Ralph Holyoke for a three year term from July 18, 2011 to July 18, 2014. Harbour Station Commission: to re- appoint Mark McAuliffe for a three year term from July 18, 2011 to July 18, 2014. Saint John Industrial Parks: to re- appoint Councillor Farren from July 18, 2011 until the end of his current term on Council; to re- appoint Kathy Craig, Andy Simpson and Andy Lodge each for a term from July 18, 2011 to December 31, 2011. Saint John Substandard Properties Appeal Committee: to re- appoint Councillor Snook from July 18, 2011 until the end of his current term on Council. Saint John Parking Commission: to re- appoint Lionel Bordage for a three year term from August 18, 2011 to August 18, 2014. Environment Committee: to appoint Craig Campbell for a three year term from July 18, 2011 to July 18, 2014. 21 96 -330 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL AUGUST 2, 2011/LE 2 AOUT 2011 Greater Saint John Regional Facilities Commission: to re- appoint Mayor Court, Councillor Sullivan and Councillor Higgins from July 18, 2011 until the end of their current terms on Council. Justice Complex Advisory Committee: to re- appoint Mary Blatherwick and Scott Gibson each for a three year term from July 18, 2011 to July 18, 2014. Fundy Trail Development Authority Inc.: to appoint Graeme Stewart - Robertson for a three year term from July 18, 2011 to July 18, 2014. Taxation Review Committee: to appoint Don Watson from July 31, 2011 to December 31, 2011. PRO Kids: to re- appoint Connie Coffin and Charles Jensen each for a term from July 18, 2011 to December 31, 2013. Question being taken, the motion was carried. 4.3 Comite plenier : Recommandations de nominations pour sieger aux comites Proposition du conseiller Titus Appuyee par le conseiller Snook RESOLU que, comme le recommande le comite plenier, s'etant reuni le 18 juillet 2011, le conseil communal approuve les nominations suivantes pour sieger aux comites : Comite consultatif de I'Organisme de gestion des services d'urgence de Saint John : La nomination de Dan Houghton pour un mandat de deux ans allant du 18 juillet 2011 au 18 juillet 2013. Conseil consultatif du parc Rockwood : Le renouvellement des nominations de Greg Burgess, Steve Langille et de John Acker, chacun pour un mandat d'un an allant du 18 juillet 2011 au 18 juillet 2012; le renouvellement des nominations de Tom Chesworth pour un mandat d'un an allant du 30 aout 2011 au 30 aout 2012 et le renouvellement de la nomination de Jamie LeMesurier, pour un mandat d'un an allant du 18 juillet 2011 au 18 juillet 2012. Comite consultatif sur les taxis : La reconduction des mandats de Donald LeBlanc, Gary Williston, Mack Tobias et de Christine Saumure allant du 18 juillet 2011 au 31 decembre 2011. Bureau des commissaires de la police de Saint John : Le renouvellement de la nomination de Christopher Waldschutz pour un mandat de trois ans allant du 18 juillet 2011 au 18 juillet 2014. Comite de surveillance du centre des congres : La reconduction du mandat du conseiller Sullivan allant du 18 juillet 2011 jusqu'a la fin de son mandat actuel au sein du conseil et le renouvellement de la nomination de Ralph Holyoke pour un mandat de trois ans allant du 18 juillet 2011 au 18 juillet 2014. Commission de Harbour Station : Le renouvellement de la nomination de Mark McAuliffe pour un mandat de trois ans allant du 18 juillet 2011 au 18 juillet 2014. Pares industriels de Saint John : La reconduction du mandat du conseiller Farren allant du 18 juillet 2011 jusqu'a la fin de son mandat actuel au sein du conseil et le renouvellement des nominations de Kathy Craig, Andy Simpson et d'Andy Lodge, chacun pour un mandat allant du 18 juillet 2011 au 31 decembre 2011. Comite d'appel sur les residences non conformes aux normes de Saint John : Le renouvellement de la nomination du conseiller Snook pour un mandat allant du 18 juillet 2011 jusqu'a la fin de son mandat actuel au sein du conseil. Commission sur le stationnement de Saint John : Le renouvellement de la nomination de Lionel Bordage pour un mandat de trois ans allant du 18 aout 2011 au 18 aout 2014. 22 96 -331 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL AUGUST 2, 2011/LE 2 AOUT 2011 Comite sur I'environnement : La nomination de Craig Campbell pour un mandat de trois ans allant du 18 juillet 2011 au 18 juillet 2014. Commission regionale des installations du Grand Saint John : Le renouvellement de la nomination du maire Court, du conseiller Sullivan et de la conseillere Higgins pour un mandat allant du 18 juillet 2011 jusqu'a la fin de leur mandat actuel au sein du conseil. Comite consultatif sur le centre judiciaire : Le renouvellement des nominations de Mary Blatherwick et Scott Gibson, chacun pour un mandat de trois ans allant du 18 juillet 2011 au 18 juillet 2014. Fundy Trail Development Authority Inc.: La nomination de Graeme Stewart - Robertson pour un mandat de trois ans allant du 18 juillet 2011 au 18 juillet 2014. Comite de revision de I'impot foncier : La nomination de Don Watson pour un mandat allant du 31 juillet 2011 au 31 decembre 2011. PRO Kids : Le renouvellement des nominations de Connie Coffin et Charles Jensen, chacun pour un mandat de trois ans allant du 18 juillet 2011 au 31 decembre 2013. A I'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. 5. Consent Agenda 5.1 That the ONE Change Inc. request to present to Council regarding management and operations of the C.E. Nicolle Community Centre be referred to the Clerk to schedule. 5.2 That the Milford Park Committee request to present be referred to the Clerk to schedule. 5.3 That as recommended by the City Manager in the submitted report M &C 2011- 197: Engagement of Engineering Consultant for Material Testing and Inspection Services, and notwithstanding the City's Procurement Policy for engagement of professional services, Common Council authorize staff to conduct negotiations for the engagement of Gemtec Limited to provide Materials Testing and Inspection Services for 2011. 5.4 That as recommended by the City Manager in the submitted report M &C 2011- 198: 2011 Service Contract between Accu -Link and The City of Saint John, The City of Saint John enter into a Service Contract with Accu -Link in the form and upon the terms and conditions set out in the Service Contract submitted with said report, for the purposes of providing a One -call Service and that the Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to execute the said Contract. 5.5 That as recommended by the City Manager in the submitted report M &C 2011- 199: Design Services: Loch Lomond Road (Russell Street to Westmorland Road) Water and Sanitary Sewer Main Renewal and Road ReconstructionCommon Council authorize the Engineering Services Agreement with exp Services Inc. for engineering design services for the Loch Lomond Road Reconstruction Project be increased from $48,301 to $83,900.41 (including the City's eligible HST rebate). 5.6 That Common Council receive for information the submitted report M &C 2011- 200: Public Information Session — Crown Street SLS #8 and Force Main Harbour Clean - Up Construction Project. 5.7 That Common Council receive for information the submitted report M &C 2011- 194: Public Information Session — Prince William Street (Civic #221 to Civic #270) Street Reconstruction. 5.8 That as recommended by the City Manager in the submitted report M &C 2011- 183: Westmorland Road (Westmorland Mall to Kervin Road) Roadway Reconstruction, Contract 2010 -16: Westmorland Road (Westmorland Mall to Kervin Road) Roadway Reconstruction be awarded to the low tenderer, Galbraith Construction Ltd., at the tendered price of $506,827.60 as calculated based upon estimated quantities, and 23 96 -332 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL AUGUST 2, 201 VLE 2 AOUT 2011 further that the Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to execute the necessary contract documents. 5.9 That the Saint John Transit Commission presentation of Financial Position Year to Date and Forecast for the balance of 2011 be referred to the Clerk to schedule. 5.10 That as recommended by the City Manager in the submitted report Mispec Park — Repso/ Canada Ltd., the Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to execute the agreement between The City of Saint John and Repsol Canada Ltd., in its capacity as the managing general partner of Canaport LNG Limited Partnership. 5.11 That as recommended by the City Manager in the submitted report M &C 2011- 192: Easement Acquisition for Municipal Storm and Sanitary Sewer Lines — Part of 330 Green Head Road, The City of Saint John acquire an Easement for Municipal Services in and through the lands at civic #330 Green Head Road, as per the submitted Agreement of Purchase and Sale, and as illustrated on the submitted Easement Sketch, titled "Milford Drainage Basin Storm water System Improvements "; and authorize the Mayor and Common Clerk to sign any document(s) necessary to finalize this transaction. 5.12 That as recommended by the City Manager in the submitted report M &C 2011- 202: Sludge Trailer, the proposal negotiated by staff with NexGen Municipal Inc., to build a replacement trailer for vehicle 489, a 1999 Delco Sludge hauling trailer, in the amount of $194,300.00 plus tax, be accepted. 5.13 That as recommended by the City Manager in the submitted report M &C 2011- 195: Street Naming, Common Council amend the list of Official Street Names and approve the following change: Add the name rue Hubert Street. 5.14 That Common Council receive for information the submitted report M &C 2011- 191: Building Permit Application — 109 Crowley Road. 5.15 That as recommended by the City Manager in the submitted report Little River Reservoir Park — Irving Oil Refining GP, the Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to execute the Early Access Agreement between The City of Saint John and Irving Oil Refining GP in relation to the Little River Reservoir Park redevelopment in the submitted form. 5.16 That the request to have reinstated a Labour Day Parade in the City of Saint John be referred to the Police Commission. 5.17 That as recommended by the City Manager in the submitted report Little River Reservoir Park/ Park Maintenance Agreement, the City enter into the Park Maintenance Agreement in the form and upon the terms and conditions as submitted with said report and that the Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to execute the said agreement. 5.18 That as recommended by the City Manager in the submitted report M &C 2011- 205: Harbour Clean -Up Marsh Creek Collector Sewer and 600mm Sanitary Forcemain Installation Project, the City of Saint John enter into agreement(s) with Canadian National Railway (CN) to permit the installation of a forcemain pipe crossing and sanitary main pipe crossing under the CN tracks at Mile 0.18 Courtenay Bay Spur (Saint John), located off Egbert Street, upon the terms and conditions set by CN in their letters and documents submitted with M &C 2011 - 205 for the sum of $1,250.00+ HST, if applicable, for each of the crossings; and further that the City of Saint John enter into agreement(s) with Canadian National Railway (CN) to permit the installation of a forcemain pipe crossing and sanitary main pipe crossing under the CN tracks at Mile 0.62 Dry Dock Spur (Saint John), located off Bayside Drive, upon the terms and conditions set by CN in their letters and documents submitted with M &C 2011 -205 for the sum of $1,900.00+ HST, if applicable, for each of the crossings; and further that the Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to sign all documentation in this regard. 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. 24 96 -333 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL AUGUST 2, 201 VLE 2 AOUT 2011 5. Questions soumises a I'approbation du conseil 5.1 Que la demande de presentation devant le conseil de ONE Change Inc. visant la gestion des operations du Centre communautaire C.E. Nicolle soit transmise a la greffiere pour qu'elle fixe une date de presentation. 5.2 Que la demande soumise par le comite du parc Milford visant a se presenter devant le conseil soit transmise a la greffibre pour qu'elle fixe une date de presentation. 5.3 Que, comme le recommande le directeur general dans le rapport soumis intitule M/C 2011 -197: Embauche dun ingenieur- conseil pour les services d'essai des materiaux et d'inspection, le conseil communal, nonobstant la politique d'approvisionnement de la Ville relativement au recours a des services professionnels, autorise le personnel a entreprendre des negociations avec Gemtec Limited pour fournir des services de mise a I'essai et d'inspection du materiel pour 2011. 5.4 Que, comme le recommande le directeur general dans le rapport soumis intitule M/C 2011 -198: Contrat de services en 2011 conclu entre Accu -Link et The City of Saint John, The City of Saint John conclue un contrat de services avec Accu -Link dans la forme et selon les modalites enoncees dans le contrat de services soumis avec ledit rapport, dans le but de fournir un service unique et que le maire et la greffiere communale soient autorises a executer ledit contrat. 5.5 Que, comme le recommande le directeur general dans le rapport soumis intitule M/C 2011 -199: Services de conception: Renouvellement de la conduite d'eau principale et refection du chemin Loch Lomond (de la rue Russell au chemin Westmorland); le conseil communal accepte que la convention relative aux services d'ingenierie conclue avec exp Services Inc., visant les services de conception technique et la realisation du projet de refection du chemin Loch Lomond, soit modifiee en faisant passer le montant de 48 301 $ a 83 900,41 $ (y compris le remboursement de la taxe de vente harmonisee auquel la municipalite est admissible). 5.6 Que le conseil communal accepte a titre informatif le rapport soumis intitule M/C 2011 -200: Seance informative publique — Station de relevement no 8 de la rue Crown et conduite de refoulement dans le cadre du projet de construction et de nettoyage du port. 5.7 Que le conseil communal accepte a titre informatif le rapport soumis intitule M/C 2011 -194 : Seance informative publique relative aux travaux de refection de la rue Prince William (du numero municipal 221 au numero municipal 270). 5.8 Que, comme le recommande le directeur general dans le rapport soumis intitule M/C 2011 -183: Refection du chemin Westmorland (du centre commercial Westmorland au chemin Kervin), le contrat no 2010 -16 : relatif aux travaux de refection du chemin Westmorland (du centre commercial Westmorland au chemin Kervin) soit accorde au soumissionnaire le moins - disant, Galbraith Construction Ltd., au prix offert de 506 827,60 $, etabli a partir de quantit6s estimatives et, que le maire et la greffiere communale soient autorises a signer les documents contractuels necessaires. 5.9 Que la presentation de la situation financiere a ce jour et des previsions pour le reste de I'annee 2011 par la Commission des transports de Saint John soit transmise a la greffiere pour qu'elle fixe une date de presentation. 5.10 Que, comme le recommande le directeur general dans le rapport soumis intitule Parc Mispec — Repso/ Canada Ltd., le maire et la greffiere communale soient autorises a signer 1'entente soumise entre The City of Saint John et Repsol Canada Ltd., en sa qualite d'associee commanditee gestionnaire de la societe en commandite Canaport GNL. 5.11 Que, comme le recommande le directeur general dans le rapport soumis intitule M/C 2011 -192: Acquisition dune servitude relative au reseau municipal d'egout sanitaire et d'egout pluvial visant le 330, chemin Green Head, The City of Saint John fasse I'acquisition d'une servitude pour services municipaux sur les terrains situes au 330, chemin Green Head, conformement a la convention d'achat -vente soumise et au croquis de servitude soumis intitule « Modernisation du reseau d'egout pluvial du bassin versant de Milford », et que le maire et la greffiere communale soient autorises a signer tous les documents necessaires a la conclusion de cette transaction. 25 96 -334 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL AUGUST 2, 201 VLE 2 AOUT 2011 5.12 Que, comme le recommande le directeur general dans le rapport soumis intitule M/C 2011 -202: Remorque pour boues, la proposition negociee par le personnel avec NexGen Municipal Inc., visant a construire une remorque de remplacement pour le vehicule 489, une remorque pour boues Delco 1999, d'un montant de 194 300 $ (taxes en sus), soit acceptee. 5.13 Que, comme le recommande le directeur general dans le rapport soumis intitule M/C 2011 -195: Attribution de nom de rue, le conseil communal modifie la liste des noms de rue officiels et approuve la modification suivante : Ajout du nom rue Hubert Street. 5.14 Que le conseil communal accepte a titre informatif le rapport soumis intitule M/C 2011 -191 : Demande de permis de construction concernant le 109, chemin Crowley. 5.10 Que, comme le recommande le directeur general dans le rapport soumis intitule Parc du reservoir Little River— Irving Oil Refining G. P., le maire et la greffibre communale soient autorises a signer 1'entente relative a I'acces anticipe conclue entre The City of Saint John et Irving Oil Refining G.P., relativement au reamenagement du parc du reservoir Little River, dans la forme et selon les modalites enoncees. 5.16 Que la demande de retablir le defile de la fete du Travail dans The City of Saint John soit transmise a la Commission de police. 5.17 Que, comme le recommande le directeur general dans le rapport soumis intitule Parc du reservoir Little River— Entente relative a 1'entretien du parc, la Ville conclue une entente relative a 1'entretien du parc dans la forme et selon les modalites soumises avec ledit rapport, et que le maire et la greffibre communale soient autorises a signer ladite entente. 5.18 Que, comme le recommande le directeur general dans le rapport soumis intitule M/C 2011 -205 : Projet lie a ('installation d'une conduite de refoulement de 600 mm et d'un egout collecteur au ruisseau Marsh dans le cadre du nettoyage du port, The City of Saint John conclue un contrat avec la Compagnie des chemins de fer nationaux du Canada (CN) en vue d'installer une conduite de refoulement et une conduite sanitaire principale passant sous les voles ferrees du CN au point milliaire 0,18 de 1'embranchement Courtenay Bay (Saint John), situe pres de la rue Egbert, conformement aux conditions etablies par le CN dans les lettres et les documents soumis avec le contrat no M/C 2011 -205 pour la somme de 1 250 $ (TVH en sus, le cas echeant) pour chacun des points de rencontre, et, de plus, que The City of Saint John signe une entente avec la Compagnie des chemins de fer nationaux du Canada (CN) en vue d'installer une conduite de refoulement et une conduite sanitaire principale passant sous les voies ferrees du CN au point milliaire 0,62 de 1'embranchement Dry Dock (Saint John), situe pros du chemin Bayside, conformement aux conditions etablies par le CN sans les lettres et les documents soumis avec le contrat no M/C 2011 -205 pour la somme de 1 900 $ (TVH en sus, le cas echeant) pour chacun des points de rencontre, et que le maire et la greffiere communale soient autorises a signer la documentation afferente a cet egard. Proposition du conseiller Titus Appuyee par le conseiller McGuire RESOLLI 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. 7. Proclamation 7.1 Greater Saint John Gay Pride Week August 6 -14, 2011 The Mayor proclaimed the week of August 6th to 14th, 2011 as "The Greater Saint John Gay Pride Week" in the City of Saint John. 7. Proclamation 7.1 Festival de la semaine de la fierte gaie du Grand Saint John, du 6 au 14 aout 2011 Le maire declare la semaine du 6 au 14 aout Semaine du Festival de la semaine de la 26 96 -335 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL AUGUST 2, 201 VLE 2 AOUT 2011 fierte gaie du Grand Saint John dans The City of Saint John. 10. Consideration of By -laws 10.1 Third Reading Traffic By -Law Amendment Re: Dorchester Street On motion of Councillor Farren Seconded by Councillor McGuire RESOLVED that the by -law entitled "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," amending Schedule B and Schedule J regarding Dorchester Street, be read. Question being taken, the motion was carried. The by -law entitled "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" was read in its entirety. On motion of Councillor Titus Seconded by Councillor McGuire RESOLVED that the by -law entitled "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," amending Schedule B and Schedule J regarding Dorchester 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 "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." 10. Etude des arretes municipaux 10.1 Troisieme lecture du projet de modification de I'Arrete relatif a la circulation visant la rue Dorchester Proposition du conseiller Farren Appuyee par le conseiller McGuire RESOLU que 1'arrete intitule « Arrete modifiant I'Arrete relatif a la circulation dans les rues de The City of Saint John edicte en vertu de la Loi sur les vehicules a moteur (1973) et modifications afferentes », modifiant I'annexe B et I'annexe J relativement a la rue Dorchester, fasse I'objet d'une lecture. A Tissue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. L'arrete intitule « Arrete modifiant I'Arrete relatif a la circulation dans les rues de The City of Saint John edicte en vertu de la Loi sur les vehicules a moteur (1973) et modifications afferentes » est lu integralement. Proposition du conseiller Titus Appuyee par le conseiller McGuire RESOLU que 1'arrete intitule « Arrete modifiant I'Arrete relatif a la circulation dans les rues de The City of Saint John edicte en vertu de la Loi sur les vehicules a moteur (1973) et modifications afferentes », modifiant I'annexe B et I'annexe J relativement a la rue Dorchester, fasse I'objet d'une troisieme lecture, que ledit arrete soit edicte et que le sceau communal y soit appose. A Tissue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. Troisieme lecture par titre de 1'arrete intitule « Arrete modifiant I'Arrete relatif a la circulation dans les rues de The City of Saint John, edicte en vertu de la Loi sur les vehicules a moteur (1973) et modifications afferentes ». 27 96 -336 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL AUGUST 2, 201 VLE 2 AOUT 2011 10.2 Third Reading Parking By -Law Amendment Re: Dorchester Street On motion of Councillor Titus Seconded by Councillor Sullivan RESOLVED that the by -law entitled "A By -Law to Amend a By -Law With Respect to Parking Zones and the Use of Parking Meters and Pay and Display Machines" amending Schedule "A ", regarding Dorchester Street, be read. Question being taken, the motion was carried. The by -law entitled "A By -Law to Amend a By -Law with Respect to Parking Zones and the Use of Parking Meters and Pay and Display Machines" was read in its entirety. On motion of Councillor Titus Seconded by Councillor McGuire RESOLVED that the by -law entitled "A By -Law to Amend a By -Law With Respect to Parking Zones and the Use of Parking Meters and Pay and Display Machines" amending Schedule "A" regarding Dorchester 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 "A By -Law to Amend a By -Law with Respect to Parking Zones and the Use of Parking Meters and Pay and Display Machines ". 10.2 Troisieme lecture du projet de modification de I'Arrete sur le stationnement visant la rue Dorchester Proposition du conseiller Titus Appuyee par le conseiller Sullivan RESOLU que 1'arrete intitule « Arrete modifiant I'Arrete concernant les zones de stationnement et ('utilisation des parcometres et des horodateurs », modifiant I'annexe « A » relativement a la rue Dorchester, fasse ('objet d'une lecture. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. L'arrete intitule « Arrete modifiant I'Arrete concernant les zones de stationnement et ('utilisation des parcometres et des horodateurs » est lu integralement. Proposition du conseiller Titus Appuyee par le conseiller McGuire RESOLU que 1'arrete intitule « Arrete modifiant I'Arrete concernant les zones de stationnement et ('utilisation des parcometres et des horodateurs », modifiant I'annexe « A » relativement a la rue Dorchester, 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 concernant les zones de stationnement et ('utilisation des parcometres et des horodateurs ». 13. Committee Reports 13.2 Committee of the Whole: Outstanding Contributions re: Pension Plan Going Concern Unfunded Liability On motion of Councillor Titus Seconded by Councillor McGuire RESOLVED that as recommended by the Committee of the Whole, payment of $309,183.00 be made forthwith to the City of Saint John Pension Fund, for interest owing to July 31, 2011 for special payments due with respect to 2010. 96 -337 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL AUGUST 2, 201 VLE 2 AOUT 2011 Deputy Mayor Chase stated that he could not support the motion at this time as the City will soon be presenting the Province with its pension reform proposal, which he noted could reduce the unfunded liability. Councillor Farren stated that until there is a solution in place for the City's pension plan, he cannot support providing additional funding to the plan. The Commissioner of Finance stated that the City has been directed by the Superintendent of Pensions to make the payment to the pension plan for payments due with respect to 2010. Responding to a question, the Commissioner of Finance stated that it is his understanding that future reforms to the City's pension plan will not result in relief for the 2010 pension contribution obligations. Question being taken, the motion was carried with Deputy Mayor Chase and Councillors Higgins and Farren voting nay. 13. Rapports deposes par les comites 13.2 Comite plenier : Contributions impayees — Passif a long terme non capitalise du regime de retraite Proposition du conseiller Titus Appuyee par le conseiller McGuire RESOLU que comme le recommande le Comite plenier, le montant de 309 183 $ soit paye immediatement au regime de retraite de The City of Saint John, au titre des interets dus au 31 juillet 2011, pour paiements speciaux dus par rapport a 2010. Le maire suppleant Chase declare qu'il ne peut pas appuyer cette motion pour le moment, etant donne que la Ville presentera bientot a la province sa proposition de reforme des pensions, ce qui, precise -t -il, pourrait reduire le passif non capitalise. Le conseiller Farren indique que tant qu'une solution n'est pas trouvee relativement au regime de retraite de la Ville, it ne pourra pas octroyer des fonds supplementaires au regime de retraite. Le commissaire aux finances declare que le surintendant des regimes de retraite a ordonne a la Ville de payer le montant au regime de retraite, pour paiements dus par rapport a 2010. En reponse a une question, le commissaire aux finances indique qu'a sa connaissance, les futures reformes au regime de retraite de la Ville ne donneront pas lieu a une exoneration des cotisations de retraite de 2010. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. Le maire suppleant Chase ainsi que le conseiller Farren et la conseillere Higgins votent contre la proposition. 13.3 Committee of the Whole: Appointment of Acting Fire Chief On motion of Councillor McGuire Seconded by Councillor Sullivan RESOLVED that Kevin Clifford is hereby appointed Acting Fire Chief effective August 9, 2011 for the duration of the current vacancy in the position of Fire Chief or until sooner determined by Common Council. Question being taken, the motion was carried. 13.3 Comite plenier : Nomination d'un chef du service d'incendie par interim Proposition du conseiller McGuire Appuyee par le conseiller Sullivan RESOLU que Kevin Clifford soit nomme chef du service d'incendie par interim a compter du 9 aout 2011 pendant tout le temps que le poste de chef du service d'incendie restera vacant ou pour une duree inferieure a I'appreciation du conseil communal. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. 29 96 -338 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL AUGUST 2, 201 VLE 2 AO(JT 2011 13.4 Committee of the Whole: Interim Arrangements for Acting City Manager On motion of Councillor Farren Seconded by Councillor McGuire RESOLVED that in the event of the absence of City Manager J. Patrick Woods, appointment to the position of Acting City Manager is hereby made of Paul Groody, Ken Forrest and Bill Edwards, in accordance with their respective availability and the matters anticipated to require attention in the City Manager's absence, with the City Manager to administer the arrangement. Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor Higgins voting nay. 13.4 Comit6 pl6nier : Arrangements provisoires au sujet du directeur g6n6ral par int6rim Proposition du conseiller Farren Appuyee par le conseiller McGuire RESOLLI que, dans le cas ou le directeur general J. Patrick Woods serait absent, cette fonction soit occupee par Paul Groody, Ken Forrest et Bill Edwards, en fonction des disponibilites de chacun et des sujets devant etre examines en I'absence du directeur general. II est en outre resolu que le directeur general definisse Ies modalites de la presente disposition. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. La conseillere Higgins vote contre la proposition. 12.2 City Manager: Proposed City of Saint John Ice Time Allocation and Management Policy On motion of Councillor Farren Seconded by Councillor Snook RESOLVED that item 12.2 City Manager: Proposed City of Saint John Ice Time Allocation and Management Policy be tabled until the next meeting of Council. Question being taken, the motion was carried. 12.2 Directeur g6n6ral : Politique propos6e par The City of Saint John relativement a I'allocation et a la gestion de temps de glace Proposition du conseiller Farren Appuyee par le conseiller Snook RESOLLI que le point 12.2 Directeur general Politique propos6e par The City of Saint John relativement a I'allocation et a la gestion de temps de glace, soit reporte a la prochaine reunion du conseil. A I'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. 12.5 City Manager: Green Infrastructure Fund — Funding Request Combined Sewer Overflow Reduction On motion of Councillor Court Seconded by Councillor Snook RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager in the submitted report M &C 2011 -167. Green Infrastructure Fund — Funding Request Combined Sewer Overflow Reduction, Common Council: 1) Adopt the funding request under the Green Infrastructure Fund for the combined Sewer Overflow Reduction project; and 2) Authorize the Mayor to send the submitted funding request to the Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities and otherwise follow -up with the appropriate Federal representatives to secure funding for this very important Combined Sewer Overflow Reduction project. Question being taken, the motion was carried. 30 96 -339 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL AUGUST 2, 201 VLE 2 AOUT 2011 12.5 Directeur general : Fonds pour ('infrastructure verte — Demande de financement pour la reduction de la decharge de I'egout unitaire Proposition du conseiller Court Appuyee par le conseiller Snook RESOLU que, comme le recommande le directeur general dans le rapport soumis intitul6 M/C 2011 -167: Fonds pour 1'infrastructure verte — Demande de financement pour la reduction de la decharge de 1'egout unitaire, le conseil communal: 1) adopte la demande de financement en vertu du Fonds pour ('infrastructure verte concernant le projet de reduction de la decharge de I'6gout unitaire; 2) autorise le maire a transmettre la demande de financement soumise au ministre des Transports, de ('Infrastructure et des Collectivit6s, ou a en faire le suivi aupres des representants des gouvernements f6deraux appropries en vue de garantir le financement de ce projet capital, a savoir la reduction de la decharge de I'egout unitaire. A I'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. 12.6 City Manager: Bridge Street Sanitary Lift Station #23 Force Main & Sewer Installation On motion of Councillor Titus Seconded by Councillor Snook RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager in the submitted report M &C 2011 -196: Contract No. 2011 -12: Bridge Street Sanitary Lift Station #23, Force Main & Sewer Installation be awarded to the low tenderer, Galbraith Construction Ltd., at the tendered price of $1,406,903.11 as calculated based upon estimated quantities, and further that the Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to execute the necessary contract documents. Question being taken, the motion was carried. 12.6 Directeur general : Installation de la conduite d'eau principale et de I'egout sanitaire a la station de relevement no 23 de la rue Bridge Proposition du conseiller Titus Appuyee par le conseiller Snook RESOLU que, comme le recommande le directeur general dans le rapport soumis intitul6 M/C 2011 -196, le contrat no 2011 -12 relatif a ('installation de la conduite d'eau principale et de I'egout sanitaire a la station de relevement no 23 de la rue Bridge soit accorde au soumissionnaire le moins - disant, Galbraith Construction Ltd., au prix offert de 1 406 903,11 $, etabli a partir de quantit6s estimatives et, que le maire et la greffiere communale soient autorises a signer les documents contractuels necessaires. A I'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. 11. Submissions by Council Members 11. Interventions des membres du conseil 14. Consideration of Issues Separated from Consent Agenda 14. Etude des sujets ecartes des questions soumises a I'approbation du conseil 15. General Correspondence 15. Correspondance gen6rale 16. Adjournment 2011. The Mayor declared the meeting adjourned at 1:00 a.m. on August 3rd 31 96 -340 COMMON COUNCIL /CONSEIL COMMUNAL AUGUST 2, 2011/LE 2 AOUT 2011 Items forwarded to the August 15, 2011 Council Agenda: 11.2 Sydney Street Courthouse (Councillor Titus) 11.3 Standing Committee System (Councillor Titus) 11.4 Council Budget — Salaries (Councillor Titus) 11.5 Traffic Restrictions on Uptown Streets During Outdoor Market (Councillor Higgins) 13.1 Planning Advisory Committee: 111 Molson Avenue — Subdivision Application 12.7 City Manager: Dress Uniforms — Fire Department Items forwarded to the August 29, 2011 Council Meeting: 12.3(a) City Manager: Solid Waste Management Service — Outsource Decision 12.3(b) City Manager: Community Solid Waste Management Service 12.4 City Manager: Wellfield Protection — Harbourview Subdivision 16. Levee de la seance Le maire declare que la seance est levee a 1 h le 3 aout 2011. Points reportes a I'ordre du jour du conseil du 15 aout 2011 : 11.2 Palais de justice de la rue Sydney (conseiller Titus) 11.3 Systeme des comites permanents (conseiller Titus) 11.4 Budget du conseil — Salaires (conseiller Titus) 11.5 Restrictions imposees a la circulation dans les rues du centre -ville lors de la tenue du marche en plein air (conseillere Higgins) 13.1 Comite consultatif d'urbanisme : Demande d'amenagement de lotissement au 111, avenue Molson 12.7 Directeur general : Uniformes de grande tenue du service d'incendie Points reportes a la seance du conseil du 29 aout 2011 : 12.3a) Directeur general : Service de gestion des dechets solides — Decision liee a I'impartition 12.3b) Directeur general : Service communautaire de gestion des dechets solides 12.4 Directeur general : Protection des champs de captage — Lotissement Harbourview Mayor / maire Common Clerk / greffiere communale 32 REPORT TO COMMON COUNCIL M &C2011 -178 m.�. July 12th, 2011 n. His Worship Mayor Ivan Court The city of saint john and Members of Common Council Your Worship and Members of Council, SUBJECT: Wellfield Protection - Harbourview Subdivision BACKGROUND Approximately 252 homes in the Harbourview Subdivision receive drinking water from two (2) wells operated by the City of Saint John as part of its formal Approval to Operate drinking water facilities, as issued by the Minister of Environment. The primary well on Seaward Crescent typically services the demand of the subdivision; the back -up well is on Ocean Drive. The wells date back to the early 1970s. Work is currently underway to provide disinfection of these drinking water supplies — in accordance with the drinking water standards of the Province of New Brunswick. In recognition of the need to protect vital groundwater supplies, the Province introduced a Wellfield Protection Program (WPP) in October 2000. The Program enables the Minister, with the approval of the Lieutenant - Governor in Council, to issue a Wellfield Protected Area Designation Order under the Clean Water Act, Regulation 2000 -47 - for the purpose of protecting the quality and quantity of municipal groundwater sources.' When a wellfield area is so designated, prohibitions or limitations on chemical storage and land use can be imposed for the good of the public groundwater supply. It makes far more sense to prevent water contamination in the first place than to try to clean up a contaminated wellfield or find an alternative source of drinking water. Within a designated protected area, the Minister of Environment may: 1. Allocate the use of water; 2. Control, prohibit, or limit any activity or thing which might impair the quality or quantity of the water; 3. Restrict or prohibit unsuitable land uses; and 4. Establish and enforce guidelines and standards for the purpose of protecting the quantity and the quality of the water supply. 1 New Brunswick Regulation 2000 -47 under the Clean Water Act, 2000 1 New Brunswick Regulation 2000 -47 under the Clean Water Act, 2000 33 Report to Common Council (M &C 2011 -178) July 12"', 2011 Wellfield Protection — Harbourview Subdivision Page 2 of 6 The WPP provides the means to protect the ground water supply while ensuring equitable consideration for property owners within the designated area. Officials from Saint John Water and the New Brunswick Department of Environment have been working collaboratively to have the Harbourview wellfield recharge areas designated as protected under the Clean Water Act, Regulation 2000 -47. ANALYSIS The first step involved identification of the recharge areas (also known as the wellfield protection areas) which feed these neighbourhood wells. GEMTEC Limited was engaged in 2009 (M &C 2009 -146) to undertake the Wellfield Protection Study for Harbourview. The study's final report2 has now been received. As part of the study, a senior hydrogeologist delineated the recharge areas for each production well using a 3 -D groundwater flow model to determine the various protection zones for the Harbourview Wellfield. While groundwater models are mathematical representations of natural groundwater flows, the Harbourview model is considered a predictive tool for identification of wellfield protection areas. A sensitivity analysis of the model indicated a negligible discrepancy (equal to or less than 0.7 %). The creation of three protection zones (A, B and C) around a municipal wellfield reflects the fact that different contaminants persist in the environment for different lengths of time, move at different rates and pose different health risks. Figures 4 and 5, attached, from the GEMTEC report shows delineations for Zones A, B and C. These zones have varying degrees of controls; dictated by the types of contaminants and their tendency to degrade, be absorbed or get filtered from the groundwater. A brief summary of the three zones follows, with the contaminants to focus on identified for each protection zone. The most stringent controls are required for areas closest to the well - Zone A where groundwater travel times to the well are less than 250 days (or 100 days for sand and gravel aquifers). Zone B surrounds Zone A and represents a groundwater travel time from 250 days (or 100 if sand/gravel) to 5 years. Zone C surrounds Zones A and B with groundwater travel times of 25 years. Zone C is located furthest from the wellhead. Zone A Zone A is the most sensitive; a high risk area identified for protection from bacteria and viruses. It is generally accepted that bacteria and viruses will be eliminated when their residence time (time of travel to the wellhead) is greater than 250 days in a bedrock aquifer. Examples of sources of these contaminants include septic tanks, leaking sewer lines, sewage sludge disposal and sanitary landfill leachate. A WPP would impose restrictions and controls on these types of activities. Zone B Zone B is the protection area for liquid petroleum products - defined by a 5 -year groundwater travel time; sufficient time for petroleum contaminants to break z Wellfield Protection Study Harbourview Subdivision, GEMTEC Limited on behalf of the City of Saint John, final report dated July 8't', 2011. 34 Report to Common Council (M &C 2011 -178) July 12"', 2011 Wellfield Protection — Harbourview Subdivision Page 3 of 6 down based on the permitted volume of 1,200 litres. The most common threat for petroleum products entering the groundwater is from leaks in underground storage tanks and home heating oil tanks. Examples of liquid petroleum products include gasoline, diesel, kerosene, furnace oil and vehicle lubricants. Petroleum solvents include varsol, turpentine, paint cleaner and thinner, toluene and xylene. Petroleum by- products such as acetone, benzene, ethylene glycol and methanol would also be restricted. Maximum quantities permitted vary depending upon the specific chemical as shown below in Table 6 from the Wellfield Protection Study report. Schedule C from the New Brunswick Regulation 2000 -47 under the Clean Water Act provides a more detailed list. Table 6 — Wellfield Protection Areas Harbourview Subdivision Wellfield Protection Study Chemical or Activity :A_r -p., �u Petroleum fuel storage 25 litres maximum 1200 litres maximum 2000 litres maximum Petroleum solvent storage ( Varsol) 10 litres maximum 65 litres maximum 500 litres maximum Chlorinated solvent storage Not permitted Not permitted Not permitted Pesticide and preservative storage 10 kg or 10 litres whichever is less 15 kg or 15 L whichever is less 50 kg or 50 L whichever is less New sewage system installations Not permitted Permitted Permitted Manure storage Not permitted Allowed with controls Allowed with controls Manure application Not permitted Allowed with controls Allowed with controls Mining and aggregate removal Not permitted Not permitted Not permitted Inorganic fertilizers Storage Usage 10 kg maximum Allowed with controls 15 kg maximum Allowed with controls 50 kg maximum Allowed with controls Forestry Operations Salvage cutting Selection cutting Selection cutting Groundwater extraction Not permitted 9000 litres /day maximum 9000 litres /day maximum Groundwater heat pumps Not permitted Not permitted Not permitted Road salt Storage allowed to a maximum of 50 kg Storage allowed to a maximum of 50 kg Storage allowed to a maximum of 50 kg Note: Listed values are the maximum allowable amounts per parcel. Amounts do not include personal or commercial vehicles or their payload. Zone C Zone C, farthest from the wellhead, is determined by 25 -year groundwater travel time. Primary concerns for this protected area are chlorinated solvents; contaminants much more persistent than others and hence the need for longer travel times and larger protected areas. Examples include dry cleaning fluid, spot remover, metal 35 Report to Common Council (M &C 2011 -178) July 12"', 2011 Wellfield Protection — Harbourview Subdivision Page 4 of 6 degreasers and paint removers. Controls in Zone C are reduced again from those in A and B; however, as with protection areas A and B, chlorinated solvents, groundwater heat pumps and mining of aggregates are not permitted. Land Use Land use within the groundwater recharge areas is also considered. As part of the Harbourview Study, current land uses were reviewed to assess potential conflicts with the Wellfield Protected Area Designation Order. This involved site visits to examine existing land uses within the wellfield areas. The City's Municipal Plan and Zoning By -law were also reviewed to determine the range of permitted land uses within the zones. In addition, past land uses were considered - to determine potential risks to the aquifer. Zone A There are separate Zone A areas for the two production wells; collectively covering an area of approximately 3 hectares. Zone A for the Ocean Drive Well contains 16 properties along with portions of the municipal right -of -way, homeowner association lands and travelled portions of Harbourview Drive, Ocean Drive, Redrock Court and Dewar Street. Most parcels contain single - family dwellings. The Seaward Crescent well area contains 15 parcels along with portions of the municipal right -of -way and traveled portions of Seaward Crescent and Aberdeen Avenue. Zone B Zone B encompasses 162 properties or portions thereof in an area of about 18 hectares. The majority of the existing land use comprises single - family homes and associated common areas under the control of a homeowners association. The remaining developed areas are municipal streets and a playground. Within Zone B, three dwellings were confirmed to have fill pipes for heating oil and one property a heating oil tank. In addition, a parked petroleum delivery truck was observed on Ocean Drive on two occasions near the transition boundary from Zone B to Zone C. At the eastern most edge of the subdivision, Zone B encompasses approximately 140 to 150 linear metres of the two Irving Oil crude oil pipelines running from Canaport to the refinery. See Figure 5 (attached) of the GEMTEC report. Zone C Zone C for the two wells covers an area of about 75 hectares and contains 42 properties, the majority single family homes. One home was confirmed as having heating oil fill pipes. There are also lands zoned "Pits and Quarries" and "Rural ". The "Pits and Quarries" zoning permits pits, quarries, topsoil removal and the excavation of sand, clay, shale, limestone and other deposits. Parcel PID 00339960 was rezoned in 2007 to permit the existing gravel pit operation, however during rezoning restrictions were noted. For instance, the disturbed area was limited to a maximum of 4 hectares, excluding the driveway with all other areas to be undisturbed or rehabilitated. An additional condition of the zoning does not allow for trucks or equipment to be stored on the site unless part of an active excavation. 36 Report to Common Council (M &C 2011 -178) July 12"', 2011 Welliield Protection — Harbourview Subdivision Page 5 of 6 Summary - Present Non - Conforming Land Uses There are no present non - conforming land use issues in Zone A. Within Zone B the major issue pertains to the presence of the two crude oil pipelines at the northeast edge of the Seaward Crescent Welliield. This will require an exemption under the Regulation. Other more minor issues relate to the presence of oil heating at several properties and the parked petroleum delivery truck. To address the residential issues in Zone B, upgrades to oil storage systems to provide secondary containment will be required and the parking of a petroleum delivery truck on city streets within the welliield will have to be addressed. Within Zone C the major issues from a land use perspective are the presence of the crude oil pipelines (noted for Zone B) and the existing gravel pit located east of Bayside Drive. Both activities require an exemption under the Regulation. Any potential forestry operations within the protected zones would be limited and required to practice selective cutting. Water Ouality Overall the inorganic and organic water quality for the two wells is good with only minor exceedences of turbidity and iron in samples collected from the Ocean Drive well. The microbiological water quality of the two production wells is very good, with no E. Coli detected in either well and only sporadic detection of coliform bacteria in each. The sporadic detection of coliform is being addressed through the current capital project to add a chlorine injection system at the newly upgraded Ocean Drive Well House and then the Seaward Crescent Well House. With both wells located in close proximity (less than 600m) to the Bay of Fundy (major salt water body), there is always a concern with the potential for saltwater intrusion. However, through a review of water quality records and some testing previously completed, the data indicates the wells have not been influenced by saltwater. Steps in Protecting the Wellfield Subsequent to the presentation to Council as part of this report submission, Council will be asked to resolve that the wellfields be protected. Should Council determine that this is in the public interest; a letter would be sent from the Mayor on behalf of Council to the Minister of Environment requesting protection under the Regulation. An open house would be organized by the Department of Environment and Saint John Water would participate in that open house. This would provide an opportunity to discuss the protection areas with the general public, explain what the regulation would mean, seek input, and answer any questions — all before the regulation would be amended. (A 37 Report to Common Council (M &C 2011 -178) July 12"', 2011 Wellfield Protection — Harbourview Subdivision Page 6 of 6 direct mail out invitation will go out to all residences within the proposed protected area prior to the open house, as well as general invitations through the local media). Once completed, protection areas would be considered for designation by the Minister. Once supported by the Minister, the regulation makes its way to the Legislature, where a motion to amend the regulation is made and the wellfield delineations added. Residential non - conformances are usually addressed by the Department of Environment. Those affected are given time to get into compliance with the regulation. The pipeline and the gravel pit are both previously existing uses that may be eligible for exemption; something the Department of Environment as the regulatory authority will need to consider. Exemptions for gravel pits in Protected Areas B and C have been approved previously in other wellfields. INPUT FROM OTHER SOURCES Officials of the Department of Environment, which has been working collaboratively on Harbourview wellfield protection with Saint John Water, will be making a presentation to Council in conjunction with the consideration of this report. Community Planning and Development has also been consulted. RECOMMENDATIONS It is recommended that Common Council: 1. Resolves to proceed with seeking formal protection/designation of the Seaward Crescent and Ocean Drive Wellfields under the Clean Water Act, Regulation 2000 -47. 2. Direct the Mayor to send a letter on behalf of Council to the Minister of Environment requesting that Regulation 2000 -47 be amended to include the Wellfield delineations as `add -ons' to Schedule A. 3. Once the Regulation has been amended and the Wellfields designated as protected, direct staff to proceed with placing signage on streets and roadways within these areas to alert the public that they are entering /in protected areas. Respectfully submitted, J. M. Paul Groody, P. Eng. Commissioner, Municipal Operations & Engineering J. Patrick Woods, CGA City Manager W 1 1 /, pp 6 IRvm OIL PIPELINES (APPRO) , I - I 11102' pb,9 $oases , ° 9 NS 9 o o b / 00��858 SEA i�p0338�61- y ° $ g N \ I 55pp9963 X. I I I I o�„tly' I 65MM 00�`166AA 39 I I Op331�Q9,,/ 31691 / p033a335 I I LEGEND PRODUCTION WELL ® 250 DAYS 5 YEARS 25 YEARS W > W Drawn By Checked By W 39960 AGSD VB pQ3 Calculations By Checked By Q ' m Date I I �' 6gAl I I NOV, 2009 Project HARBOURVIEW SUBDIVISION WELLFIELD PROTECTION STUDY, SAINT JOHN, NB Drawing WELLFIELD PROTECTION AREAS Scale 1:5000 0 100 200 300m File No. Drawing Revision No. 04183503 1 FIGURE 4 1 0 C EME CONSULTING F- AND SCIENTIS i IRVJNG OIL PIPELINES (APPR X 13 133311 - I Qp 000%'�4 I 0954,962 55019046 4 OCEAN SEA $� $ rol 550'9963 � ''338335 I I I I > I LU 1 Q I IM I I I I I I I I I I i 55969948 ' I El 00339960 I �- / I LEGEND PRODUCTION WELL ZONE A ZONE B ZONE C Drawn By Checked By AGSD VB Calculations By Checked By Date NOV, 2009 Project HARBOURVIEW SUBDIVISION WELLFIELD PROTECTION STUDY, SAINT JOHN, NB Drawing PROPOSED PROTECTION AREAS Scale 1:5000 0 100 200 300m File No. Drawing Revision No. 04183503 1 FIGURE 5 1 0 GEMTD, CONSULTING ENGINEE- - AND SCIENTISTS IRVJNG OIL PIPELINES (APPR X 13 133311 - I Qp 000%'�4 I 0954,962 55019046 4 OCEAN SEA $� $ rol 550'9963 � ''338335 I I I I > I LU 1 Q I IM I I I I I I I I I I i 55969948 ' I El 00339960 I �- / I LEGEND PRODUCTION WELL ZONE A ZONE B ZONE C Drawn By Checked By AGSD VB Calculations By Checked By Date NOV, 2009 Project HARBOURVIEW SUBDIVISION WELLFIELD PROTECTION STUDY, SAINT JOHN, NB Drawing PROPOSED PROTECTION AREAS Scale 1:5000 0 100 200 300m File No. Drawing Revision No. 04183503 1 FIGURE 5 1 0 GEMTD, CONSULTING ENGINEE- - AND SCIENTISTS City of Saint John Welifield Protection Mark Bader, B.Sc. Regional Water Planning Officer (Region 5) NB Department of Environment August 2, 2011 41 A ew No i u� u sw c Be...in this place • Etre ... id on le peut Drinking Water Protection Province of New Brunswick Municipal Wellfields 57 Wellfields /municipalities 20% of population 150 000 people Domestic Wells .. , 40% of population Surface Water 300 000 people 30 watersheds /21 municipalities 40% of population 300 000 people �:- B?ew-i&NV1 uk c 42 Be ... in this place • Etre ... ici on le peut Municipal Wellfield Protection Province of New Brunswick • 57 municipalities. • -200 wells • -150 000 people • 34 Designated Wellfields • Miramichi partially designated d 43 Be ... in this place • Etre ... ici on le peut Drinking Water Protection Elements of Drinking Water Protection Source Ik Protectio Treatment Processes Monitorin di Traini Source Protection: A proactive approach water protection. .M, s to drinking B?ew,-�MNquveau k s Be ... in this place • Etre ... ici on le peut Municipal Wellfield Protection Regulation under the Clean Water Act • Regulation Established in CI .. a..., 2000 under the Clean Water Act. NEW BRUNSWICK under the CLEAN WATER ACT '0 C. 811Dd511 • Wellfield Protected Area ).flk C11- .13.3000 Under wh-h I I-N 11 of the C /ran ft— All. the Minr with the Ap , Ikl of nc� g G--.. Cwrr[il. mak<sthcfollowinBD[rigna- • nn Order: Designation Order. ,i TMr QDmayecircdu the Wr °field,. «redAO OraiRnm/on iwdre � It Iif,,I An. Alloft.. - w,wan�mhargearcuurpw- s A. gmunJ wat<r — C, areas drown u a Zane A. ZoncBma] rcCon the map anxMd • Based on groundwater travel as n <m�f -,f,. brt<hartW-, potion ( wundw recharge area. Thar scd as , -f cr fur a puhl c gnru -w supply syu< Jesignat[dupwt tN ■ t1 m es ■ The Aqd C moms sm out m the mt t, h m. al[r B ane a are imposN m rclmion w <a[n pw- rrcJ area shown u a Zane JA.. Zone B or a Zone C nn the map couched as Sch[duk A. Tbu 0,4,,—. dro/ ton 0-k, 1.3000. • Regulates land uses and chemical storage. 45 Rt:OLEMENT OU NOUVEAU - BRUNSWICK SW0.�] tub. en _. dr 1. LOI SUR L•ASSAINISSEMENT DE L•EAU ID.C. 3000,J511 Dim I[ I!,rprrarrbm 2" En vertu du paragraph[ Ial I I do la Ln ,ur I.— d, k M..W. av[cI[cunsenm- nrsdu lieu nr -gw —61. PrcM k Ohm do designation su�� r rn rcL<prium dhm p[ut etrc cite sous le t trc : Di- drdi,ign.ri a d crrorporigi duclmmpdr cnpragr- lai,ur l'u,aairri„rmrnr dr l'ran. Tuutn les aircs m, d' <nrmian J'un< l— raw - ou Ics panics J'aim d'alime on J'u nappew inJiyufe>a me Nan I— yu'A.— A. wr<m J<> mm J'alimenrariun m'a nanp[vwtenmrr<aa d[ >pMnier aaircr J•a. a J'urw nappc wur J uis nt uri tinrctJe wurcrs '<aa puurm ns tallation d'. J'ap. pp pw.is m public c rte >. wnt dFSrgrkes [n unt que r[acurs pnxcgismi Gs mrWJions W- oua Armea[s B n C ci- F-46Z.,epco mel6 -1 une,wrehA un[a,[xK B ou une am[ C sup la cane jmnu rn tans qu'An- neae A. Gpci—rdi—f rnrrc rn rignrurl� / ^xrobn 3000. BrWu "° Nouveau n sw c Be ... in this place • Etre ... ici on le peut Municipal Wellfield Protection Protection zones - typical wellfield k7&4 one'i4_, High_ Ris Zone B - 11l dium Risk Zone -Low Risky // Municipal Wellfield Protection Controls on Storage of Chemicals and Activities • Petroleum fuels 9 Fo re s try •Petroleum solvents •Groundwater extraction • Chlorinated solvents •Road construction • Pesticides •Residential buildings • Microbiological sources •Commercial, Institutional, • Groundwater heat pumps and Industrial buildings • Fertilizer (Nitrates) •Mining &aggregate removal °- BiunswicK 47 Be ... in this place . EVe ... id an le part Municipal Wellfield Protection Petroleum Fuels • Gasoline • Kerosene • Diesel • Heating Oil • Permitted Storage — Zone A — Zone 8 — Zone C 2, Ile 2GUU 5 gallons =22.7 L U-01 Brunswick Be ... in this place • Etre ... ici on le peut Municipal Wellfield Protection Home Heating Oil Tank Exemption • Zone A — Exemption expires 13 years after designation. BUT 3 years after designation, must have tank under 10 year old • Zone B — Exemption expires 15 years after designation. (Zone B — 1200 L). Secondary containment at year 15. BUT have 5 years to have a tank under 10 years old. • Zone C — No exemption needed. M •7 BiNew "wi uk u s c Be ... in this place • Etre ... ici on le peut 11 11 11 11 Municipal Wellfield Protection Microbiological Sources Zone A Zone 8 Zone C Zone A Not Permitted Permitted Permitted — No new municipal sanitary sewer systems — No new septic systems — No liquid or dry manure application — No livestock grazing 671] B FtffiswicK "° u Be ... in this place • Etre ... ici on le peut Municipal Wellfield Protection Transportation • Existing roads are permitted • Road Salt use is permitted (limits on storage 50Kg) • Temporary passage of chemicals through wellfield is permitted (max. 2hours) — no overnight parking 51 B Nouveau i u n sc k Be ... in this place • Etre ... ici on le peut Municipal Wellfield Protection Wellfield Protection Process • Study to Identify the Protected Area • Review Municipal Plan • Land Use Survey • Resolution of Council • Public Meetings 52 • Designate the Protected Area under the Wellfield Protected Area Designation Order • Controls on Storage of Chemicals &Land Activities B iunswiW"° uk u c Be ... in this place • Etre ... ici on le peut Municipal Wellfield Protection Saint John, Harbourview Subdivision • Wellfield study conducted in 2009 -2011 (CFP April 2009, final report revisions June 2011) - Identified protected area - Reviewed municipal plan - Conducted a land use survey • 2 wells, Ocean Drive &Seaward Crecent • Designation of existing wellfields on a voluntary basis B FtffiswicK No u 53 Be ... in this place • Etre ... ici on le peut Harbourview Subdivision Wellfield y.r `L 1] EAD NN r 1 4 E �k • I !' 0%, 1 a %k5 � � r 5 0 240.0 4SO.0 m Protected Area A -Ocean Drive Well Protected Area `A' contains 16 residential properties, RoWs, a portion of homeowner assocation land, city streets -Seaward Crescent Protected Area `A' contains 14 residential parcels, municipal RoWs, city streets r _ •� r li y y--_�S wro �{ *, ..`anCe�rr - ■y v g s " L O " { f Ile S woe f��3 6roG�'E r H' 1.4 } Oro m Protected Area B -includes 162 properties, primarily residential land use, RoWs, municipal streets and a play ground -Appear to be four properties in `B' with home heating oil tanks, needs to be ' confirmed (exemptions required) -Occasionally an oil delivery truck is k parked on Ocean Drive in Zone `B' _ J -Also includes 140 -150 linear metres of - $ oil pipeline (exemption required) .:.. '. - v Ly J 4.... _. ,{ s. woe r�8 woo oe Oro 4 m r m Protected Area C -Contains 42 properties, including residences, and other lands zoned as Pits and Quarries, and Rural -Two gravel pits (exemption required) -Crude oil pipeline (Canaport to refinery) ..� 4' •, U61 I i� n dO .0 '0 \% , o Vk �} \1L ep 57� Oe r P ected. Ar ,a } m Municipal Wellfield Protection Cost Benefits of Wellfield Protection • Ratio of contamination costs vs. basic prevention costs are as high as 200 to 1 • Contaminated Municipal Production Well ($200) • Remediation • Groundwater Exploration • Extend Distribution System • Treatment System • Basic Prevention Costs ($1) • Wellfield Protection Studies • Wellfield Designation Order iNea&NVouveauBc k 58 Be ... in this place • Etre ... ici on le peut MMOMIM. Questions Mark Bader, B. Sc. Regional Water Planning Officer 8 Castle Street Saint John, NB (506) 658 -2558 Mark. Bader(cb,gnb. ca http: / /Www. gnb. ca /0009 /037110001IWellfield -E. pdf We Brunswick Be ... in this place • Etre ... ici on le peut REPORT TO COMMON COUNCIL M &C2011 -89 June 17, 2011 His Worship Mayor Ivan Court And Members of Common Council Your Worship and Members of Council, SUBJECT: SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT SERVICE — OUTSOURCE DECISION INTRODUCTION The City of Saint john Effective solid waste management is an essential municipal service — important for reasons of public health, quality of life, and the cleanliness of properties and streetscapes. Staff is undertaking a comprehensive review of the service — based on principles of sustainability, quality service, prudent financial management and responsibility on the part of every citizen. This is one of several solid waste topics that will be reported over the coming months. Purpose of Report This report presents a financial and operational review of collection alternatives; essentially, "in- house" City resources or utilization of "contracted" carriers - a "make- versus -buy" choice. BACKGROUND Currently, 19 of 53 solid waste collection routes are contracted (based on available resources), while the remainder are serviced by City employees and equipment. The Solid Waste Management Service has been a highly rated municipal service with respect to citizen satisfaction. In 2009 and 2010, an average of 79% of citizens was satisfied (very or somewhat) with service delivery and an average of 86% of citizens believes that this service is `very important'. ANALYSIS Periodic operational and financial analysis of the Solid Waste Management Service is necessary to ensure the City provides optimal service delivery and receives the best value for the allocated funding. As operational and/or financial conditions change, the service must adapt to new realities. 5U5TAINA51LITY .0 5olidWaste Management 5ervice— OutsourcingF_)ecision June 17, 201 1 KeFort to Common Council, M &C 201 1 -89 Page 2 In 2010, the City sought and received `Expressions of Interest' from local contractors to provide sole source contracted solid waste and compost collection services for a total of 22,190 households, of which 3,795 customers receive weekly collection service. Two contractors submitted bids - based on 2009 solid waste /compost disposal expense information. Bids were also received for the existing 19 contracted routes and for an arrangement that would contract 50% of the routes; the other 50% operated by the City. The enclosed Solid Waste Collection Financial Analysis — Outsource Decision dated June 17th, 2011 (Appendix A) has been prepared by Finance. It compares three alternatives: [ #1] the status quo, the existing 64 %/36% split between internal and external collection; [ #2] bringing all collection "in house" and terminating the current contract arrangement; and [ #3] outsourcing all collection activity. The objective of the analysis was to provide financial guidance for a decision on selecting the most cost - effective collection option for Saint John. The author cautions that "readers ... should take note of the scope limitations section ... in addition to carefully reviewing the assumptions within that drive the financial results ". When assessing alternative #3, it had to be assumed the City could reduce the cost of its workforce. Reduction of wage and benefit costs would be a key to pursuing such an option. Although alternative #3 was deemed competitive, though not superior, its feasibility is constrained by the City's collective agreement with CUPE, Local 18 and the commitment to maintain a minimum number of workers. Although staff will discuss the alternative during its presentation, it is not one that is viable under existing conditions. The comparisons outlined herein look at #1 (status quo - split) and #2 ( "in house "). The financial analysis indicates that City equipment and employees can provide all solid waste and compost collection services at a savings of about $1.3 million over 5 years, with operational savings on an absolute basis of approximately $500,000 annually. The discounted payback period is expected in 1.81 years on the initial upfront investment of approximately $794,000 required for three additional packer units. Based on a 5 -year projection of annual costs for all 25,985 units (18,395 bi- weekly + 2 x 3,795 weekly), it is projected that the City can provide this service for all units at an overall average rate of $11.42 per unit per month over the next five years. Once the current annual supply contract, for contracted collection services, expires in September 2011, a necessary extension of services for a period of approximately 8 to 10 months would be needed (depending on equipment availability) for transition to full "in- house" collection. Personnel Considerations Factors impacting service delivery include personnel and equipment availability. We highlight the good job done by solid waste and compost collection personnel. A core group of stalwarts has enabled the City to deliver an excellent collection service. In the 5U5TAINANLITY 61 Solid Waste Management Service — Outsourcing J)ecision June 17, 201 1 KeFort to Common Council, M &C 201 1 -89 Page j past, however, wear and tear on some employees has been telling. Team members have been lost for periods of time and their non - availability has made service delivery difficult. In cooperation with Local 18, a pilot project began in 2009 where new personnel start out in solid waste and then `graduate' to another service area in time. Lost time in this service area has been reduced by over 75% in 2009 and 2010 when compared to 2008. Should City forces provide city -wide collection service; four additional personnel at the entry Skilled Worker level would be required; re- allocated from other service programs. Equipment Fleet The City's solid waste fleet currently consists of seven (7) side - loading one - person packers and a mini - packer unit for litter clean up. This equipment is scheduled for replacement every 10 years with several packers due to be replaced in the next few years through the Fleet `reserve' fund. Six of the seven packer units are beyond their optimum replacement point, but are less than ten years old. In continuous operations of this nature, equipment is heavily utilized and subject to breakdown. An evening shift instituted in the mechanical garage has played a crucial role towards the operational readiness of this equipment. Equipment availability is a central consideration in planning and setting route schedules for any continuous service. Garbage /compost must be collected on the appointed day and transported to Crane Mountain. In order to ensure service reliability, a level of equipment redundancy must be built into service schedules. All pieces of equipment cannot be scheduled for deployment every day. Should City forces provide city -wide collection service, a side - loading one - person packer with dual access and two rear - loading two- person split packers would need to be added to the existing fleet to offset current contract resources; to enable consistent service delivery and ensure efficiency of service on narrow roads, in uptown traffic and on one -way streets. 5U5TAINANLITY 62 t. 5olidWaste Management 5ervice— OutsourcingF_)ecision June 17, 201 1 KeFort to Common Council, M &C 201 1 -89 Page 4 Service Continuity A solid waste service performed entirely by municipal employees increases the risk of service disruption in times of labour strife. Solid waste (garbage) becomes a critical public health issue when collection does not occur in a timely and thorough manner. Despite this, the costs versus benefits of City personnel providing collection services at this time cannot be ignored. The local contracting community could still be engaged in the future should economic realities and cost -of- service circumstances change. Collective Agreement Provisions A letter of agreement with Local 18 that would make necessary amendments to the collective agreement on career structure and wage levels for solid waste workers will be brought forward. A "no strike / no lock -out" provision for those essential service workers had also been considered, but the union advised that it could not agree with such a provision in the context of a single service and without fully considering provisions to address the broader interests of its membership. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Cost implications are presented in the attached financial analysis prepared by Finance. CONCLUDING REMARKS The analysis of the solid waste collection service has been undertaken by staff of Finance and Municipal Operations. The changes outlined will be implemented, subject to Council's approval of 2012 funding for three additional packer units and ratification of the necessary letter of agreement with Local 18. Specific recommendations for those decisions will be brought forward soon to enable the process of change to move ahead. At this time, feedback from members of Council would be appropriate. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that Common Council receive and file this report. Respectfully submitted, J.M. Paul Groody, P.Eng. J. Patrick Woods, CGA Commissioner, City Manager Municipal Operations & Engineering 5U5TAINANLITY 63 SAINT JOHN NEW BRUNSWICK SOLID WASTE COLLECTION Financial Analysis — Outsource Review June 17th, 2011 Table of Contents EXECUTIVESUMMARY .............................................................................. ............................... 3 -4 INTRODUCTION £t BACKGROUND ..................................................................... ..............................5 OBJECTIVE............................................................................................... ............................... 6 METHODOLOGY......................................................................................... ............................... 7 SCOPELIMITATION ...................................................................................... ..............................8 KEYASSUMPTIONS ................................................................................. ............................... 9 -10 BUDGET PROJECTION ( PRO - FORMA) ............................................................. ............................... 11 FINANCIAL ANALYSIS ................................................................................ ............................... 12 DIFFERENTIAL COST ANALYSIS (STATUS QUO VERSUS `IN- HOUSE' ) ............................................................. ............................... 12 BaseCase ........................................................................................................................................................ .............................12 Sensitivity Analysis — Best, Worst & Most Likely Case ........................................................................... ............................... 13 -14 BudgetImpact Analysis ................................................................................................................................... .............................14 Conclusion & Recommendation ...................................................................................................................... .............................15 DIFFERENTIAL COST ANALYSIS (`IN- HOUSE' VERSUS `OUTSOURCE') ............................................................ ............................... 16 BaseCase ........................................................................................................................................................ .............................16 Sensitivity Analysis — Best, Worst & Most Likely Case ................................................................................... .............................17 BudgetImpact Analysis ................................................................................................................................... .............................18 Conclusion & Recommendation ...................................................................................................................... .............................19 RISKFACTORS ........................................................................................ ............................... 20 2 65 The City provides for collection of refuse and compost, through the Solid Waste Collection Service, at 22,190 eligible residential households in accordance with the Solid Waste By -Law. Approximately 18,395 of those households receive service on a bi- weekly basis, while 3,795 households in priority neighbourhoods are serviced weekly. This amounts to collection at 25,985 units (18,395 +3,795 +3,795) during every two week period, utilizing both "in- house" resources (16,718 collection units) and contracted services (9,267 units) by FERO Waste and Recycling Inc. ( "FERO "). A re- evaluation of the service and its methods of delivery have been undertaken. On the matter of solid waste collection, the City can decide to proceed with the following options: 1. Continue with the Status Quo which means servicing 16,718 units with "In- House" resources and outsourcing 9,267 units with contracted services ( "Alternative #1 "); 2. Bring all 25,985 units "In- House" and terminate existing contractor services ( "Alternative #2 "); 3. Outsource all 25,985 units to the contractor that provides the most competitive pricing and acceptable service level ( "Alternative #3") The objective of this report is to provide financial analysis that is useful for making a decision associated with the above alternatives. The readers of this report should take note of the scope limitations section of the report in addition to carefully reviewing the assumptions within that drive the financial results. Alternative #1 versus Alternative #2 Finance produced a differential cost analysis to compare the cost of providing solid waste collection services via Alternative #1 versus Alternative #2. With assumptions vetted by operations, Finance estimates Alterative #2 will result in increased value for the City by approximately $1,387,000 over a 5 year period. This is supported by an expected reduction in annual operating costs of approximately $500K per annum. However, given the inherent uncertainty of assumptions, different financial results could arise. Finance sensitivity tested the assumptions for the number of City workers required and percentage of contingency afforded to produce best case, worst case and most likely case scenarios. The base case provides for 4 additional City workers and offers a 5% contingency. On a best case scenario (4 additional City workers and no contingency) Finance estimates Alternative #2 will yield value accretion of $1,631,176 over 5 years. On the flipside, a worst case scenario provides for 6 City workers and an additional 10% contingency, reducing the value increase to $581,666 over the same period. The most likely result will be somewhere in between, estimated between $989,413 and $1,507,847 over a 5 year period. Applying probabilities produces an expected case of approximately $1,292,000 over 5 years. Operations indicate a call for bids was sent in August of 2010 for the units currently serviced by FERO, for which FERO was the lowest bidder. The expectation is sending another call for bids would yield similar results. Based on this information and the results established in the financial model, Finance concludes Alternative #2 would achieve better value for money for the City. Alternative #2 versus Alternative #3 Expressions of interest (EOI) were solicited for Alternative #3 with Waste Management of Canada Corporation ( "WMCC ") being the lowest bidder. Based on assumptions vetted by operations, and based on the WMCC bid, Finance estimates Alternative #2 provides marginally higher value for money over the 7 year term by approximately $255,000. This is supported by an expected reduction in annual operating costs of approximately $225K per year. .. However, given the inherent uncertainty of assumptions, different financial results could arise. The base case assumes Alternative #2 would require 4 additional City workers in Solid Waste and incorporates a 5% contingency. A best case scenario assumes 4 additional City workers is sufficient and incorporates no contingency, resulting in estimated value accretion of approximately $784,694 over 7 years. On the other hand, a worst case scenario assumes 6 City workers are required and adds a 10% contingency, diluting value by approximately negative $974,447 over the same period. The most likely result will be somewhere in between, estimated between a negative value of $350,469 and a positive value of $521,093 over the 7 year term. Applying probabilities produces an expected case of approximately $137,000 in positive value, basically a breakeven between the two alternatives. Paramount to any outsource decision is the cost of wages and benefits. When assessing Alternative #3, Finance had to assume the City is unrestricted in its ability to reduce the cost of its workforce; otherwise the financial analysis of Alternative #3 is moot. Wages and benefits are the single largest savings when undertaking such a review. The reality, however, is the collective agreement with Local 18 commits the City to maintain a minimum of 293 outside workers. Unless otherwise negotiated it is unlikely that savings can be realized by means of a permanent workforce reduction. Finance recommends sustaining the "In- House" business model at this point in time due to the following: 1. Finance estimates value accretion for the "In- House" approach as the most probable result 2. Start-up cost would be significant if the City needed to get back into the solid waste business 3. There is rate uncertainty in the WMCC contract, with a clause for rate increases for fuel and inflation 4. Uncertainty of feasibility for a permanent workforce reduction to generate required savings However, WMCC did put forward a very competitive proposal. The value gap between the two alternatives over 7 years is slim. Further investigation and discussion may be merited given the EOI expressly states opportunity for a lower rate based on a longer term agreement. Finance recommends if such discussions do proceed, a formula be agreed upon representing annual inflation and fuel increases that is transparent for both parties. In addition, given the significant start-up costs required to get back into the solid waste business, Finance recommends the proposal be based on a longer term than 5 -7 years. A positive business case is also dependent on the City's ability to reduce wages and benefits. Finally, the financial model should be refreshed if these events were to occur. Business Case & Risk Management The financial projections within this report should form part of an overall business case to provide Council with a comprehensive picture aligned with the City's overall corporate strategy. The business case should consist of a thorough analysis of the City's needs, opportunities, threats (risks), and alternatives. From a risk management perspective, Finance suggests the strategy addresses the following business issues: 1. Risk of loss of service quality and control in the outsource model 2. Business interruption risks from labour disputes and strikes 3. Business interruption risks from contractor business closure 4. Uncertainty in long term contractor rates 5. Quality of monitoring, reporting, information needs 6. Impact on employee morale 67 INTRODUCTION & BACKGROUND Municipalities across Canada are continuously seeking ways to provide high service levels in the most cost effective manner. One approach to reduce costs is through outsourcing, provided it is not cost prohibitive and there is a business case to support it. The purpose of this report is to study that business case. For several years the City has contracted out part of the collection of its solid waste, primarily for reasons of internal capacity and resource limitations. The City provides for collection of refuse and compost, through the Solid Waste Collection Service, at 22,190 eligible residential households in accordance with the Solid Waste By -Law. Approximately 18,395 of those households receive service on a bi- weekly basis, while 3,795 households in priority neighbourhoods are serviced weekly. This amounts to collection at 25,985 units (18,395 +3,795 +3,795) during every two week period, utilizing both "in- house" resources (16,718 collection units) and contracted services (9,267 units) by FERO Waste and Recycling Inc. ( "FERO "). A re- evaluation of the service and its methods of delivery have been undertaken. Based on the 2011 budget submission, the City is expected to invest $4,113,000 in Solid Waste collection, with $1,760,000 representing contracted services. Expressions of interest (EOI) were recently solicited for the collection of all 25,985 units. Two responses were received on Thursday, August IV, 2010; one from FERO and the other from Waste Management of Canada Corporation ( "WMCC "). The EOI in no way binds the City of Saint John to either company. Pricing on a final tender would be based on fixrther due diligence supplied by the City and may result in higher or lower pricing. The following is a summary of the pricing terms within each EOI: The Finance Department was requested to provide a financial analysis to support an overall business case that compares the merits of providing solid waste services with City workers (hereinafter referred to as "In- House ") to the value of outsourcing the service to a private contractor. The financial analysis for such a business case is often referred to as a "Make- versus -Buy" decision. .: FERO Waste Management of Canada Term 3 Years with option to renew 5 -7 Years with option to renew Solid Waste & Compost $15.40 per unit per month $7.50 per household per month Disposal Cost Included in Price Excluded in Pricing Annual CPI Adjustment No Yes Fuel Included in Price Monthly Rate Adjustment The Finance Department was requested to provide a financial analysis to support an overall business case that compares the merits of providing solid waste services with City workers (hereinafter referred to as "In- House ") to the value of outsourcing the service to a private contractor. The financial analysis for such a business case is often referred to as a "Make- versus -Buy" decision. .: The City of Saint John can decide to proceed with the following options for Solid Waste Collection services: 1. Continue with the Status Quo which means service 16,718 collection units with "In- House" resources and outsource 9,267 units with FERO ( "Alternative #1) 2. Bring all 25,985 units "In- House" and terminate the FERO contract ( "Alternative #2 ") 3. Outsource all 25,985 collection units to a private contractor that provides the most competitive pricing and acceptable service level ( "Alternative #3 ") The objective of the report is to produce financial analysis that is useful for making a go forward decision. Two financial analyses will be employed: 1. Differential Cost Analysis 2. Budget Impact Analysis The report will also touch on the importance of having a business case for long term investment decisions that addresses both the financial implications and a strategy for risk management. .• Strategic investment decisions should be based on a business case that focuses on the long term to ensure the City obtains the highest value for money. Production of a financial model is critical for justifying whether an investment has value, as well as to demonstrate the long term impact of the strategic decision. A discounted cash flow ( "DCF ") analysis is considered the "gold standard" of financial analysis for measuring the value of long term investments. Cash is the most important measure in a DCF analysis, as incremental future cash flow streams are discounted to a present value to measure the value of a potential investment. The concept of incremental is an important one, as only costs that are affected by taking certain action is relevant. Fixed costs are ignored; as they exist no matter what decision is made. Discounting is another important concept. Discounting determines the present value of a stream of payments that is to be paid or received in the future. Discounting is important to ensure proper weighting is applied to costs today as well as costs into the future. Finally, DCF models also incorporate opportunity cost. Opportunity costs are the costs or benefits foregone by choosing an alternative action. DCF financial models are a powerful tool, however it is important that all inputs in the model are heavily vetted. Financial models are merely a financial tool and are only as good as the information placed within. It is imperative to obtain a comfort level with the reasonableness of the underlying assumptions. The results in a DCF model demonstrates that if the value arrived at is positive; then the opportunity may be a good one. Differential Cost Analysis According to the Government Finance Officers Association' (the "GFOA "), it is recommended that a differential cost analysis (a particular type of "DCF" analysis) be conducted when reviewing the merits of outsourcing. The differential cost analysis illustrates the value difference between two or more alternatives. Future cash flow projections are based on supportable management assumptions and known factors. Given the inherent uncertainty of assumptions, a high level of diligence is required in the vetting process. A sensitivity analysis should also be produced to demonstrate a "best case ", "worst case" and "most likely" case scenario. One major pitfall organizations sometimes fall into is comparing the total costs of alternatives rather than the differential or incremental costs. Doing so can lead to misleading results because fixed costs are often included in total cost and are irrelevant to the decision. For example, if employee costs cannot be avoided due to contractual commitments either directly or indirectly, the costs would be considered fixed and not relevant to the "Make- versus -Buy" decision. A calculation of the Internal Rate of Return ( "IRR ") and the Discounted Payback Period (DPP) often accompany these analyses. The IRR is an indicator of investment return while the DPP calculates the amount of time until the investment is recovered. Budgetary Impact Assessment As expected, there will also be interest in projecting what the City's budget may look like for each alternative. The DCF analysis provides an assessment of value whereas the budget demonstrates funding requirements. ' "Make or Buy? "— R. Gregory Michel, GFOA Manager of Research and Consulting, August 2004 70 SCOPE LIMITATION Readers of this report should take note of the various scope limitations within this document: 1. As it relates to Alternative #3 on page 6, paramount to any outsource decision is the cost of wages and benefits. When assessing Alternative #3, Finance had to assume that the organization is unrestricted in its ability to reduce the cost of its workforce; otherwise the financial analysis of Alternative #3 is moot. Wages and benefits are the single largest savings when undertaking such a review. In reality, however, the collective agreement with Local 18 commits the City to maintain a minimum of 293 outside workers. Unless otherwise negotiated it is unlikely that savings can be realized by means of a permanent workforce reduction. In light of this, for purposes of assessing Alternative #3, the report should be used as an illustrative example of what could possibly be achieved if such limitations did not exist. Some savings may or may not be achievable through reallocation of the permanent workforce. This would require further financial analysis and is considered out of scope for this report. 2. The financial analysis is specifically geared to the solid waste services provided today. Other potential value added services not currently offered, such as curb side recycling, were not contemplated and are outside the scope of this report. 3. Operating and business practices were not reviewed for synergistic cost savings by Finance (i.e. route scheduling, manpower scheduling, etc.) and is also considered outside the scope of the analysis, although Operations should seek to optimize such considerations. 4. Finance did not review any potential impact to service levels from changing the current business model. Questions regarding service level should be posed to Operations. 5. Finance did not analyze the costs associated with a potential transitioning to a user pay system. 6. Alternative #2 compares the cost of FERO services to projected "In- House" costs. The analysis is specific to the current contracted rates with FERO. The WMCC bid is outside the scope of Alternative #2 given the company placed a bid only on the entire business (all City routes). 71 KEYASSUMPTIONS Wages & Benefits • Per scope limitation #1 on page 8, for purposes of assessing Alternative #3, it is assumed the City is able to achieve, regardless of its collective agreement obligations, a reduction in wages and benefits from outsourcing solid waste collection services. • Based on Operations management, Alternative #2 would require 4 additional full time City workers in Solid Waste. Alternative #3 plans for a reduction of 13 full time equivalent positions ( "FTEs "). • Based on Operations management, for Alternative #3, through adherence with the seniority hierarchy, the reduction in 13 FTEs would be with employees that have less than 2 years of service; sufficient working notice would be provided and negligible severance payouts would be required. Expressions oflnterest WMCC's bid excludes disposal costs from their pricing; their position is that leaving these costs with the City allows for "a more competitive price ". The FERO bid includes disposal costs. Finance adjusted WMCC's bid for the estimated disposal costs and both bids for non - refundable portion of HST to establish an "apples to apples" rate. The WMCC rate was deemed lowest bid based on the following table for the first year: Term Annual Charge Estimated Disposal Costs Total Solid Waste /Compost Collection Units Monthly Unit Rate Fero WMCC $4,966,738 $2,065,577 $0 $1,410,289 $4,966,738 $3,475,866 25,985 25,985 $15.93 $11.15 ** Annual Charge includes Non Refundable Portion of HST • WMCC minimum contract term per EOI is 5 -7 years with upside potential that additional option years may result in more competitive pricing • Pricing on final tender will be based on a more detailed due diligence exchange with the City which may or may not result in higher or lower pricing on tender • WMCC rates are adjusted regularly for changes in CPI and Fuel prices Fuel Costs • Consideration to density, and fuel rates. Assumes 5% annual increase Contin .eency • To be conservative, a contingency was applied in the base case at 5% and was sensitivity tested 72 Capital Investment • Alternative #2 requires the purchase of 3 solid waste packers. The 3 packers would consist of 1 side loading 1 person packer, and 2 rear loading 2 person split packers and have an estimated average unit price of approximately $264,667. • The City currently has a fleet of 7 side loading 1 person packers. • Based on Fleet Management, the useful life of a packer is estimated to be 10 years Debt Financing • Discount rate - 5.5% • Borrowing Term — 15 Years Tipping Fees • Based on budget and tonnage information from Operations management • Refuse Rate - $108 per ton • Compost Rate - $28 per ton Salvage Value • Finance consulted with Fleet Management to estimate salvage value for the current packer fleet, which are typically salvaged through an auction process • Fleet Management suggests a declining balance depreciation calculation and a straight line depreciation calculation is a reasonable basis to estimate salvage value. The straight line method depreciates over a 10 year useful life. The Declining - Balance method assumes depreciation of 30% on the initial purchase price (year one) and then a further 20% each consecutive year from the previous year balance. • Based upon the above parameters, salvage value is estimated at approximately $260,000 (mid -point below) as reflected below: $197,922 $322,520 Midpoint $ 260,221 Estimate $ 260,000 Employee Lost Time • Opportunity cost calculated based on historical payroll records, and include sick time, workers compensation, medical, family care, union business, and other non work related absences. 10 73 Residual Values Packers Veh # Purchase Price 30/20 Straight Line (10 yrs) 2006 Ford F -550 569 $104,915 $24,065 $47,966 2001 Freightliner 640 $72,200 $10,599 $10,000 2008 International 641 $167,000 $59,853 $104,200 2003 Freightliner 643 $140,076 $17,136 $23,008 2001 Freightliner 644 $72,200 $10,599 $10,000 2006 International 646 $186,366 $42,748 $80,546 2002 International 1 647 $185,626 $15,260 $10,000 2006 International 1 648 $77,000 $17,662 $36,800 $197,922 $322,520 Midpoint $ 260,221 Estimate $ 260,000 Employee Lost Time • Opportunity cost calculated based on historical payroll records, and include sick time, workers compensation, medical, family care, union business, and other non work related absences. 10 73 BUDGET PROJECTION (PRO- FORMA) For the purpose of this report, the 2011 Solid Waste operating budget (Alternative #1 - Status Quo) was adjusted to project what the budget would look like based on an "In- House" model and based on a full outsource model with WMCC. 1. Alternative #1 (Status Quo) is based on the submitted 2011 Solid Waste Collection operating budget which includes FERO contractor fees for 9,267 collection units. 2. Alternative #2 ( "In- House ") is based on the status quo budget adjusted for 4 additional FTEs, increasing total solid waste workers from 9 to 13, to support the 9,267 units serviced by FERO. In addition, incremental tipping fees, vehicle charges and overhead costs were added. These costs are offset from the reduction in contractor fees. A further capital investment of approximately $794,000 would be required for the purchase of 3 new packers. 3. Alternative #3 (WMCC Outsource) is based on the status quo budget adjusted to remove avoidable "In- House" costs and to add the additional WMCC costs for all 25,985 units. The Pro -Forma budgets are illustrated below: Pro Forma Operating Budget Alternative #1 Status Quo Alternative #2 "in-House" Alternative #3 Outsource Based on projected 2011 Solid Waste Budget Additional Resources I Required Based on Waste Management Submission Wages & Benefits $783,391 $1,014,620 $155,812 Tipping Fees $810,000 $1,410,289 $1,410,289 Outsource Services $1,760,000 $0 $2,065,497 Vehicle Usage $479,460 $677,928 $8,736 Vehicle Fuel $107,605 $187,605 $2,000 Other $173,487 $228,525 $199,617 $4,113,943 $3,518,967 $3,841,951 Fiscal Charges $0 $96,603 $0 Total Solid Waste $4,113,943 $3,615,570 $3,841,951 3 Packers Capital Required Alternative #1 Status Quo Alternative #2 "in-House" Alternative #3 Outsource Based on projected 2011 Solid Waste Budget Additional Resources I Required Based on Waste Management Submission $0 $794,000 $0 " Annual operating budget impact for packers reflected in fiscal charges above 11 74 FINANCIAL ANAL YSIS Status Quo (Alternative #1) versus "In- House" (Alternative #2) The status quo has City workers collecting 16,718 collection units while FERO services picks up the remaining 9,267 units. The contracted price per unit with FERO is $15.40 per unit per month. In respect to scope limitation #6 on page 8 of this report, the first financial analysis compares the cost of FERO services to the cost of servicing those 9,267 units fully with "In- House" resources. Exhibit I - Differential Cost Analysis - FERO contract Based on the assumptions previously detailed, the value of replacing the current FERO contract with "In- House" resources is valued at an estimated $1,387,000 over a 5 year period. The discounted payback period on the investment in 3 packers is estimated to be within 20.75 months. The internal rate of return of 57.16% over 5 years exceeds the City's cost to acquire debt supporting a positive business case. FERO's expression of interest for all units proposed the same rate charged today for the next 36 months, thus Finance assumed the FERO rate would be fixed until year 4, and thereafter, a CPI inflation factor was applied. The detail is presented below: Solid Waste Differential CostAnal sis DCF Rounded to nearest 000's Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Incremental Savings FERO contract $ $ 1,760,000 $ 1,760,000 $ 1,760,000 $ 1,795,000 $ 1,831,000 $ - $ 1,760,000 $ 1,760,000 $ 1,760,000 $ 1,795,000 $ 1,831,000 Incremental Investment in Packers $ (794,000) Incremental "In- House" Costs Tipping Fees for 9,267 units $ - $ (600,000) $ (612,000) $ (625,000) $ (637,000) $ (650,000) 4 FTE's - Solid Waste $ - $ (231,000) $ (238,000) $ (245,000) $ (253,000) $ (260,000) Fuel - 3 Packers $ - $ (80,000) $ (84,000) $ (88,000) $ (92,000) $ (97,000) Vehicle Charges - 3 Packers $ - $ (198,000) $ (202,000) $ (206,000) $ (211,000) $ (215,000) Estimated Lost Time - 4 FTE's $ - $ (15,000) $ (15,000) $ (16,000) $ (16,000) $ (17,000) Insurance $ - $ (3,000) $ (3,000) $ (3,000) $ (3,000) $ (3,000) Admin $ - $ (12,000) $ (12,000) $ (13,000) $ (13,000) $ (13,000) Contingency (5 %) $ - $ (57,000) $ (58,000) $ (60,000) $ (61,000) $ (63,000) Change in Working Capital $ - $ (78,000) $ 4,000 $ 4,000 $ (1,000) $ (1,000) $ - $(1,274,000) $(1,220,000) $(1,252,000) $(1,287,000) $(1,319,000) Incremental "In- House" Savings $ (794,000) $ 486,000 $ 540,000 $ 508,000 $ 508,000 $ 512,000 Discounted "In- House" Savings (5.5%) $ (794,000) $ 461,000 $ 485,000 $ 433,000 $ 410,000 $ 392,000 Cumulative "In- House" Discounted Savings $ (794,000) $ (333,000) $ 152,000 $ 585,000 $ 995,000 $ 1,387,000 Discounted Payback Period 20.75 months Internal Rate of Return on Investment 57.16% over 5 years 12 75 Exhibit 2 - Sensitivityy Analysis ( Best Case, Worst Case, Most Likely Case, and Expected Case) The DCF is quite sensitive to two particular assumptions: 1. Number of additional FTEs required to service the additional 9,267 units (4 in base case) 2. Percentage contingency applied in the financial model (5% in base case) The sensitivity analysis (also referred to as the "what if' analysis) demonstrates the financial risk of volatile assumptions. Finance prepared a sensitivity analysis to test the financial model's volatility to changes in FTE and contingency for purposes of estimating a worst case, best case and most likely case scenario: Best Case: A best case scenario would see the City adding 4 FTEs and experience 0% contingency. If realized, this would give rise to a positive DCF valuation of approximately $1,631,176 over a 5 year period, a discounted payback period of 18.83 months and an internal rate of return on the investment in 3 Packers of 64.92% over 5 years. Worst Case: On the other hand, the worst case scenario, assuming 10% contingency and 6 FTEs results in a positive DCF valuation of approximately $581,666 over 5 years, with a discounted payback period of 30.54 months and an internal rate of return of 29.85% on investment. Most Likely: Finance estimates a most likely range to fall in between $989,413 to $1,507,847 over 5 years; a discounted payback period in the range of 19.75 months and 24.26 months; and an internal rate of return between 44.26% and 61.04 %. The range is outlined in green in the above sensitivity analysis. The most likely scenario is based on a 2.5 -7.5% contingency and a 4 -5 FTE requirement. Expected Case: Weightings (probabilities) were applied to the outcomes in the tables above for various ranges of contingency and FTE requirements for the discounted cash flow, payback period, and internal rate of return (see results in table in page 14). Assigning probability produces an expected result. Finance assigned a 75% probability that 4 FTEs would be required, 15% for 5 FTE's and 10% for 6 FTE's. In addition, Finance assigned the following probabilities for contingency; 5% probability that no contingency would be required, 20% probability of a 2.5% contingency, 50% probability for 5% contingency, 20% probability for 7.5% contingency, and 5% probability of a 10% contingency. Assigning these 13 76 Discounted Cash Flow (DCF) Contin enc W LL 0.00% 2.509/6 - - - - -- $1,631,176 1 $ 1,507,847 5.00% 7.50% - 10.00% - - - - -- - - - - - $ 1,387,000 $ 1,261,190 1 $ 1,137,861 4 FTE W LL 5 FTE $1,378,360 1 $ 1,248,711 $1,125,544 $ 989,574 t $ 1,119,062 $__9_89,4_13 $ 859,764 $ 853,605 $ 717,635 $ 581,666 6 FTE Best Case: A best case scenario would see the City adding 4 FTEs and experience 0% contingency. If realized, this would give rise to a positive DCF valuation of approximately $1,631,176 over a 5 year period, a discounted payback period of 18.83 months and an internal rate of return on the investment in 3 Packers of 64.92% over 5 years. Worst Case: On the other hand, the worst case scenario, assuming 10% contingency and 6 FTEs results in a positive DCF valuation of approximately $581,666 over 5 years, with a discounted payback period of 30.54 months and an internal rate of return of 29.85% on investment. Most Likely: Finance estimates a most likely range to fall in between $989,413 to $1,507,847 over 5 years; a discounted payback period in the range of 19.75 months and 24.26 months; and an internal rate of return between 44.26% and 61.04 %. The range is outlined in green in the above sensitivity analysis. The most likely scenario is based on a 2.5 -7.5% contingency and a 4 -5 FTE requirement. Expected Case: Weightings (probabilities) were applied to the outcomes in the tables above for various ranges of contingency and FTE requirements for the discounted cash flow, payback period, and internal rate of return (see results in table in page 14). Assigning probability produces an expected result. Finance assigned a 75% probability that 4 FTEs would be required, 15% for 5 FTE's and 10% for 6 FTE's. In addition, Finance assigned the following probabilities for contingency; 5% probability that no contingency would be required, 20% probability of a 2.5% contingency, 50% probability for 5% contingency, 20% probability for 7.5% contingency, and 5% probability of a 10% contingency. Assigning these 13 76 Payback Period (Months) Contingency W LL 0.00% 2.50% 5.00% 7.50% 1 10.00% W LL 4 FTE 18.831 19.75 20.75 21.85 23.08 _ 48.59% _ _ 4_4.26% _ I 39.81% 39.62% 34.82% 29.85% 5 FTE 20.76 _ 21.94 23.14 24.24 23.25 26.01 _ 24.26 25.95 28.09 r 30.54 6 FTE Best Case: A best case scenario would see the City adding 4 FTEs and experience 0% contingency. If realized, this would give rise to a positive DCF valuation of approximately $1,631,176 over a 5 year period, a discounted payback period of 18.83 months and an internal rate of return on the investment in 3 Packers of 64.92% over 5 years. Worst Case: On the other hand, the worst case scenario, assuming 10% contingency and 6 FTEs results in a positive DCF valuation of approximately $581,666 over 5 years, with a discounted payback period of 30.54 months and an internal rate of return of 29.85% on investment. Most Likely: Finance estimates a most likely range to fall in between $989,413 to $1,507,847 over 5 years; a discounted payback period in the range of 19.75 months and 24.26 months; and an internal rate of return between 44.26% and 61.04 %. The range is outlined in green in the above sensitivity analysis. The most likely scenario is based on a 2.5 -7.5% contingency and a 4 -5 FTE requirement. Expected Case: Weightings (probabilities) were applied to the outcomes in the tables above for various ranges of contingency and FTE requirements for the discounted cash flow, payback period, and internal rate of return (see results in table in page 14). Assigning probability produces an expected result. Finance assigned a 75% probability that 4 FTEs would be required, 15% for 5 FTE's and 10% for 6 FTE's. In addition, Finance assigned the following probabilities for contingency; 5% probability that no contingency would be required, 20% probability of a 2.5% contingency, 50% probability for 5% contingency, 20% probability for 7.5% contingency, and 5% probability of a 10% contingency. Assigning these 13 76 Internal Rate of Return Contingency W LL 0.00% - 2.50% - - - -- 64.92% 61.04% 5.00% - 7.50% - - - - -- - - - -- 57.16% 53.20% 10.00% 4 FTE 49.18% 5 FTE 57.03% 1 _ 52.83% _ 48.87% 44.29% _ 48.59% _ _ 4_4.26% _ I 39.81% 39.62% 34.82% 29.85% 6 FTE Best Case: A best case scenario would see the City adding 4 FTEs and experience 0% contingency. If realized, this would give rise to a positive DCF valuation of approximately $1,631,176 over a 5 year period, a discounted payback period of 18.83 months and an internal rate of return on the investment in 3 Packers of 64.92% over 5 years. Worst Case: On the other hand, the worst case scenario, assuming 10% contingency and 6 FTEs results in a positive DCF valuation of approximately $581,666 over 5 years, with a discounted payback period of 30.54 months and an internal rate of return of 29.85% on investment. Most Likely: Finance estimates a most likely range to fall in between $989,413 to $1,507,847 over 5 years; a discounted payback period in the range of 19.75 months and 24.26 months; and an internal rate of return between 44.26% and 61.04 %. The range is outlined in green in the above sensitivity analysis. The most likely scenario is based on a 2.5 -7.5% contingency and a 4 -5 FTE requirement. Expected Case: Weightings (probabilities) were applied to the outcomes in the tables above for various ranges of contingency and FTE requirements for the discounted cash flow, payback period, and internal rate of return (see results in table in page 14). Assigning probability produces an expected result. Finance assigned a 75% probability that 4 FTEs would be required, 15% for 5 FTE's and 10% for 6 FTE's. In addition, Finance assigned the following probabilities for contingency; 5% probability that no contingency would be required, 20% probability of a 2.5% contingency, 50% probability for 5% contingency, 20% probability for 7.5% contingency, and 5% probability of a 10% contingency. Assigning these 13 76 probabilities to the results in the tables above produces an expected positive valuation of approximately $1,292,000 over the 5 year period, including an expected payback period of 21.69 months and an expected internal rate of return of 54.09 %. See results in table below: Total $1,292,000 Expected Discounted Cash Flow (DCF) Weighting W 5% 1 20% 50% 20% 50 LL 75% $ 61,000 $ 226,000 $ 520,000 $ 189,000 $ 43,000 $1,760,000 15% $ 10,000 $ 37,000 $ 84,000 $ 30,000 1 $ 6,000 $187,605 10% $ 6,000 $ 20,000 $ 43,000 $ 14,000 1 $ 3,000 Total $1,292,000 Total 21.69 months Expected Payback Period Months Wei htin W 5% 20% 50% 20% 5% LL 75% 0.71 2.96 7.78 3.281 0.87 $1,760,000 15% 0.161 0.661 1.74 1 0.73 1 0.19 $187,605 10% 1 0.121 0.481 1.301 0.56 1 0.15 Total 21.69 months Total 54.09% Exhibit 3 — Budget Impact Assessment Based on assumptions, compared to the status quo, Finance estimates Alternative #2 reduces the annual operating budget requirement by approximately $498,373. With consideration to future inflationary factors, Finance estimates savings of approximately $500,000 annually. Expected Internal Rate of Return Wei htin W 5% 20% 50% 20% 5% LL 75% 2.43% 9.16% 21.43% 7.98% 1.84% $1,760,000 15% 0.43% 1.58% 3.64% 1.33% 0.30% $187,605 10% 0.24% 0.89% 1.98% 0.70% 0.15% Total 54.09% Exhibit 3 — Budget Impact Assessment Based on assumptions, compared to the status quo, Finance estimates Alternative #2 reduces the annual operating budget requirement by approximately $498,373. With consideration to future inflationary factors, Finance estimates savings of approximately $500,000 annually. $4,113,943 $3,518,967 Fiscal Charges $0 $96,603 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Total Solid Waste $4,113,943 $3,615,570 $4 -113 -943 - $3.615.570 = $498.373 14 77 Pro Forma Budget Alternative #1 Status Quo Alternative #2 "in-House" Based on projected 2011 Solid Additional Resources Waste Budget Required Wages & Benefits $783,391 $1,014,620 Tipping Fees $810,000 $1,410,289 Outsource Services $1,760,000 $0 Vehicle Usage $479,460 $677,928 Vehicle Fuel $107,605 $187,605 Other $173,487 $228,525 $4,113,943 $3,518,967 Fiscal Charges $0 $96,603 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Total Solid Waste $4,113,943 $3,615,570 $4 -113 -943 - $3.615.570 = $498.373 14 77 Conclusion - Status Ono (Alternative #I) versus "In- House" (Alternative #2 There is an interest in understanding the financial implications of replacing the current FERO contract that services 9,267 units with "In- House" resources. Finance produced a differential cost analysis based on a Discounted Cash Flow methodology to assess the value proposition. Based on assumptions in the base case, replacing the FERO contract with City workers adds approximately $1,387,000 in value over a 5 year period, a discounted payback period of 20.75 months and an internal rate of return of approximately 57.16 %. The financial model is sensitive to two particular assumptions; the number of additional FTEs required and the percentage contingency applied. A best case scenario includes a 0% contingency and 4 FTEs to produce a positive value of approximately $1,632,000 over 5 years, a discounted payback period of 18.83 months and an internal rate of return of 64.92 %. For the worst case scenario, Finance estimates a positive valuation of approximately $581,666 over 5 years, with a discounted payback period of 30.54 months and an internal rate of return of 29.85 %. The most likely scenario ranges between $989,413 to $1,507,847 over 5 years; a discounted payback period between 19.75 months and 24.26 months; and an internal rate of return between 44.26% and 61.04 %. The most likely scenario is based on a 2.5 -7.5% contingency and a 4 -5 FTE requirement. Probabilities were applied to percent contingency and number of additional FTEs to produce an expected value of approximately $1,292,000 over the 5 year period, as well as an expected discounted payback period of 21.69 months and an expected internal rate of return of 54.09 %. Based on assumptions, compared to the cost of the FERO contract, Finance estimates the "In- House" solution will reduce annual operating costs by approximately $500,000 annually. Recommendation Operations indicate a tender for bids was sent in August of 2010 for the 9,267 units currently serviced by FERO, for which FERO was the lowest bidder. The expectation is that another tender call would yield similar results. Based on this information and the results established in the financial model, Finance concludes Alternative #2 would achieve better value for money in solid waste collection for the City. 15 W "In- House" ( "Alternative #2 ") versus Outsource ( "Alternative #3 ") A financial analysis is also necessary to understand the opportunity that exists with the expression of interest from the lowest bidder, WMCC, to outsource all 25,985 collection units currently serviced. The reader must keep in mind scope limitation #1 on page 7 when interpreting the results hereunder. Differential Cost Analysis - Base Case Over a 7 year term, "In- House" solid waste collection services are estimated to generate $255,000 in value compared to contracting with WMCC contract over the same period. Even though the annual savings are estimated at $225K per year with an "In- House" approach, the break even period is estimated at 5.53 years due to the upfront investment in 3 packers combined with the opportunity cost of the current fleet salvage value (combined at over $1 million dollars). The EOI stipulates that a longer term contract than 5 -7 years may have upside pricing potential for the City. Given these factors, and considering how narrow the value gap is between the two alternatives, Finance recommends that further analysis be conducted after exploration of a longer term rate with WMCC. Exhibit 4 - Differential Cost Analysis - Outsource Decision Solid Waste Collection - Discounted Cash Flow (DCF) Rounded to nearest 000's Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Incremental Contracted Services WMCC Contract $ $ 2,065,000 $ 2,123,000 $ 2,183,000 $ 2,244,000 $ 2,307,000 $ 2,371,000 $ 2,438,000 $ $ 2,065,000 $ 2,123,000 $ 2,183,000 $ 2,244,000 $ 2,307,000 $ 2,371,000 $ 2,438,000 Incremental Investment in Packers $ (794,000) Salvage Opportunity for Packer Fleet $ (260,000) Incremental "In- House" Costs Wages & Benefits $ $ (859,000) $ (885,000) $ (911,000) $ (938,000) $ (967,000) $ (996,000) $(1,025,000) Vehicle Usage $ $ (669,000) $ (683,000) $ (696,000) $ (710,000) $ (724,000) $ (739,000) $ (754,000) Fuel $ $ (186,000) $ (195,000) $ (205,000) $ (215,000) $ (226,000) $ (237,000) $ (249,000) Other $ $ (29,000) $ (29,000) $ (30,000) $ (31,000) $ (31,000) $ (32,000) $ (33,000) Lost Time $ $ (15,000) $ (15,000) $ (16,000) $ (16,000) $ (17,000) $ (17,000) $ (18,000) Contingency (5 %) $ $ (88,000) $ (90,000) $ (93,000) $ (96,000) $ (98,000) $ (101,000) $ (104,000) Change in Working Capital $ $ (31,000) $ (1,000) $ (1,000) $ (1,000) $ (1,000) $ (1,000) $ (1,000) $ $(1,877,000) $(1,898,000) $(1,952,000) $(2,007,000) $(2,064,000) $(2,123,000) $(2,184,000) Incremental "In- House" Savings $ (1,054,000) $ 188,000 $ 225,000 $ 231,000 $ 237,000 $ 243,000 $ 248,000 $ 254,000 Discounted "In- House" Savings $ (1,054,000) $ 178,000 $ 202,000 $ 197,000 $ 191,000 $ 186,000 $ 180,000 $ 175,000 Cumulative "In- House" Savings $ (1,054,000) $ (876,000) $ (674,000) $ (477,000) $ (286,000) $ (100,000) $ 80,000 $ 255,000 Discounted Payback Period 5.53 years Internal Rate of Return on Investment 11.68% 16 79 Exhibit 5 — Sensitivity Analysis (Best Case, Worst Case, and Most Likely Case Consistent with Exhibit 2, the following sensitivity analysis demonstrates the financial risk of various assumptions. Finance prepared a sensitivity analysis to test the financial model's volatility to changes in FTE and contingency for purposes of estimating a worst case, best case and most likely case scenario: Best Case: The best case scenario (no contingency and 4 FTE) for an "In- House" service is estimated to result in a value of $784,694 over a 7 year period. A breakeven would be achieved within 3.89 years and an internal rate of return of 22.83% after the full 7 year term. Worst Case: On the other hand, the worst case scenario for the "hi-House" solution, based on a 10% contingency and 6 FTEs, could erode value by ($974,447) over 7 years, with no payback or return on investment. Most Likely: Finance estimates a most likely range to fall somewhere in between negative ($350,469) and positive $521,093 over a 7 year term based on a 2.5 % -7.5% contingency and a 4 -5 additional FTE requirement. The range is outlined in green in the above sensitivity analysis. Expected Case: As per Exhibit 2, probabilities weightings were applied for contingency (5 %, 20 %, 50 %) and FTEs (75 %, 15 %, 10 %) to produce an expected DCF valuation of approximately $137,000 over a 7 year contract. The payback period would be 75.24 months and the internal rate of return would be 8.45 %. Discounted Cash Flow (DCF) Contingency w 0.00% 2.50% 5.00_% 7.50%_ 10.00% LL 4 FTE _ _2.50% _ $ 784, 694 1 $ 521,093 _ _ $ 255,000 _ _ $ (6,110) $ 269, 712 5.53 — 5 FTE $ 464,360 $ _1_92,7_50 $ _ (78,85 $ 5350_46 $ (622,079) 4.73 6 FTE $ 144,026 $ (135,592) $ (415,210) $ (694,828) 6 FTE Best Case: The best case scenario (no contingency and 4 FTE) for an "In- House" service is estimated to result in a value of $784,694 over a 7 year period. A breakeven would be achieved within 3.89 years and an internal rate of return of 22.83% after the full 7 year term. Worst Case: On the other hand, the worst case scenario for the "hi-House" solution, based on a 10% contingency and 6 FTEs, could erode value by ($974,447) over 7 years, with no payback or return on investment. Most Likely: Finance estimates a most likely range to fall somewhere in between negative ($350,469) and positive $521,093 over a 7 year term based on a 2.5 % -7.5% contingency and a 4 -5 additional FTE requirement. The range is outlined in green in the above sensitivity analysis. Expected Case: As per Exhibit 2, probabilities weightings were applied for contingency (5 %, 20 %, 50 %) and FTEs (75 %, 15 %, 10 %) to produce an expected DCF valuation of approximately $137,000 over a 7 year contract. The payback period would be 75.24 months and the internal rate of return would be 8.45 %. Payback Period (Years) Contingency w 0.00% 2.50% 5.00% 7.50% 10.00% LL 4 FTE 3.89 4.57 5.53 7.04 9.75 5 FTE 4.73 5.82 7.61 11.16 - 14.20% 6 FTE 6.09 8.15 12.64 -17.51% $ 5,000 Best Case: The best case scenario (no contingency and 4 FTE) for an "In- House" service is estimated to result in a value of $784,694 over a 7 year period. A breakeven would be achieved within 3.89 years and an internal rate of return of 22.83% after the full 7 year term. Worst Case: On the other hand, the worst case scenario for the "hi-House" solution, based on a 10% contingency and 6 FTEs, could erode value by ($974,447) over 7 years, with no payback or return on investment. Most Likely: Finance estimates a most likely range to fall somewhere in between negative ($350,469) and positive $521,093 over a 7 year term based on a 2.5 % -7.5% contingency and a 4 -5 additional FTE requirement. The range is outlined in green in the above sensitivity analysis. Expected Case: As per Exhibit 2, probabilities weightings were applied for contingency (5 %, 20 %, 50 %) and FTEs (75 %, 15 %, 10 %) to produce an expected DCF valuation of approximately $137,000 over a 7 year contract. The payback period would be 75.24 months and the internal rate of return would be 8.45 %. Internal Rate of Return Contin enc w 0.00% 2.50% 5.00% 7.50% 10.00% LL 4 FTE 22.83% 17.45% 11.68% 5.34% -1.87% 5 FTE 16.25% 10.19% 3.46% -4.35% - 14.20% 6 FTE 9.04% 1.93% -6.46% -17.51% $ 5,000 Best Case: The best case scenario (no contingency and 4 FTE) for an "In- House" service is estimated to result in a value of $784,694 over a 7 year period. A breakeven would be achieved within 3.89 years and an internal rate of return of 22.83% after the full 7 year term. Worst Case: On the other hand, the worst case scenario for the "hi-House" solution, based on a 10% contingency and 6 FTEs, could erode value by ($974,447) over 7 years, with no payback or return on investment. Most Likely: Finance estimates a most likely range to fall somewhere in between negative ($350,469) and positive $521,093 over a 7 year term based on a 2.5 % -7.5% contingency and a 4 -5 additional FTE requirement. The range is outlined in green in the above sensitivity analysis. Expected Case: As per Exhibit 2, probabilities weightings were applied for contingency (5 %, 20 %, 50 %) and FTEs (75 %, 15 %, 10 %) to produce an expected DCF valuation of approximately $137,000 over a 7 year contract. The payback period would be 75.24 months and the internal rate of return would be 8.45 %. Tota 1 $ 137,000 17 :1 Expected Value Weighting W 5% 20% 50% 20% 5% LL 75% $ 29,000 $ 78,000 $ 96,000 $ (1,000) $ (10,000) 15% $ 3,000 $ 6,000 $ (6,000) $ (11,000) $ (5,000) 10% $ 1,000 $ 3,000 $ 21,000 $ 14,000 $ 5,000 Tota 1 $ 137,000 17 :1 The model is also sensitive to fixture rate increases from WMCC. The table below illustrate the sensitivity of rate increases: "In- House" Value WMCC Rate Increase Alternative #3 Outsource 2.00% 1 2.40% 1 2.80% 3.00% 4.00% 4 FTE 1 $ (12,874)1$ 121,463 1 $ 255,000 1 $ 326,145 1 $ 675,911 If WMCC's annual rate increase is 4 %, the value of the "In- House" approach escalates to approximately $675,911. If WMCC holds their annual rate increase to 2% over the next 7 years, the result is a virtual break - even between the two alternatives. The base model assumes a 2.8% increase representing fuel and inflation increases. Exhibit 6 — Budget Impact Assessment The Alternative #2 "In- House" Solid Waste Collection budget is projected to be less than the WMCC outsource model by approximately $226,381. Finance estimates annual budgeted savings of approximately $225K per year. See below: Pro Forma Operating Budget Alternative #2 "In- House" Alternative #3 Outsource Additional Resources Required Based on Waste Management Submission Wages & Benefits $1,014,620 $155,812 Tipping Fees $1,410,289 $1,410,289 Outsource Services $0 $2,065,497 Vehicle Usage $677,928 $8,736 Vehicle Fuel $187,605 $2,000 Other $228,525 $199,617 $3,841,951 $3,518,967 Fiscal Charges $96,603 $0 Total Solid Waste . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $3,841,951 $3,841,951- $3,615,570 = $226,381 $3,615,570 18 Conclusion — "In- House" ( "Alternative #2 ") versus Outsource ( "Alternative #3" It appears WMCC has offered a very competitive bid price. However, based on assumptions, the "In- House" approach is expected to result in a modest increase in value over 7 years versus the WMCC contract by approximately $255,000, including a discounted payback of 5.53 years and an internal rate of return of 11.68 %. Based on the level of contingency and additional workers required, on a best case scenario, the value could be as high as $784,694 with a payback period of 3.89 years and an internal rate of return of 22.83 %. This scenario assumes a 0% contingency and 4 additional FTEs. A worst case scenario could result in a negative valuation over 7 years of approximately ($974,447) with no payback or return. This scenario is based on 10% contingency and 6 FTEs. The most likely scenario will be somewhere in between, estimated at negative ($350,469) and positive $521,093 over a 7 year term based on a 2.5 % -7.5% contingency and a 4 -5 additional FTE requirement. Probabilities were applied for contingency (5 %, 20 %, 50 %) and FTEs (75 %, 15 %, 10 %) to produce an expected DCF valuation of approximately $137,000 over a 7 year contract, discounted payback period of 6.27 years and an internal rate of return of 8.45 %. The budget impact analysis illustrates that an "In- House" model will result in lower operating costs than a complete outsource model by approximately $226,381. Finance estimates annual budgeted savings of approximately $225K per year. The EOI with WMCC states that preferential pricing may be possible with a longer term agreement. The term in the EOI was for a 5 -7 year term, with annual adjustments for CPI and fuel increases. The collective bargaining agreement with Local 18 commits the City to maintain a minimum of 293 outside workers. As a result it is unlikely that savings can be realized by means of a permanent workforce reduction. In light of this, for purposes of assessing Alternative #3, the report should be used as an illustrative example of what could possibly be achieved if such limitations did not exist. Recommendation The financial results of Alternative #2 ( "In- House ") compared to Alternative #3 (WMCC) are quite interesting. Over a 7 year period Alternative #2 is projected to generate slightly higher value. However, depending on certain assumptions, the value could swing in either direction. Based on the information we have today, Finance would recommend an "In- House" solution over the WMCC solution due to the following: 1. Finance estimates value accretion for the "In- House" approach as the most probable result 2. Start-up cost would be significant if the City decided to get back into the solid waste business 3. There is rate uncertainty in the WMCC contract, with a clause allowing for rate increases at any time for fuel and inflation. There is uncertainty as to the financial impact after the 7 year term. 4. There is uncertainty as to a permanent workforce reduction to generate required savings However, WMCC did put forward a competitive bid. The value gap between the two alternatives over 7 years is slim. Further investigation and discussion may be merited given the EOI expressly states opportunity for a lower rate based on a longer term agreement. Finance recommends if such discussions do proceed, a formula be agreed upon representing annual inflation and fuel increases that is transparent for both parties. In addition, given the significant start-up costs required to get back into the solid waste business, Finance recommends the proposal be based on a longer term than 5 -7 years. A positive business case is also dependent on the City's ability to reduce wages and benefits. Finally, the financial model should be refreshed if these events were to occur. 19 Business Case & Risk Management The financial projections within this report should be part of an overall business case to provide Council with a comprehensive picture aligned with the City's overall corporate strategy. The business case should consist of a thorough analysis of the City's needs, opportunities, threats (risks), and alternatives. From a Risk Management perspective, Finance suggests the risk management strategy includes the following business issues: 1. Risk of loss of service quality and control in the outsource model 2. Business interruption risks from labour disputes and strikes 3. Business interruption risks from contractor business closure 4. Uncertainty in long term contractor rates 5. Quality of monitoring, reporting, information needs 6. Impact on employee morale 7. Waste Reduction Program 20 W City of Saint John Financial Analysis Solid Waste Collection 8/18/2011 Finance Department 84 Objectives of Financial Report To estimate the value of the following options: ➢ Continue with the Status Quo servicing 16,718 units with "In- House" resources and outsourcing 9,267 units ( "Alternative #1) ➢ Bring all 25,985 units "In- House" and terminate the current contracted services ( "Alternative #2 ") ➢ Outsource all 25,985 units E:16'7 ( "Alternative #Y) Current State ➢City provides service for 22,190 households ➢ 18,395 households have bi- weekly service ➢3,795 households receive weekly service ➢ U n its Collected 25,985 (18,395+3)795+37795) ➢ 16,718 units (64 %) collected by City workers ➢9,267 units (36 %) collected by the contractor Finance Department 86 8/18/2011 2011 Solid Waste Collection Budget Total 2011 Budget of $4,113,943 $173,487_ $587,065 4% $810,000— ZO° $783,3! 43% $1,760,000 Contractor MM Tipping Fee Vehicle /Fuel Other Finance Department 87 8/18/2011 Methodology ➢Concept of Incremental ➢Why focus on incremental savings and costs? ➢Discounted Cash Flow Analysis ( "DCF ") ➢What is a DCF? ➢What does the result tell us? ➢Why do we use discounting? ➢What is the Discounted Payback Period? ➢Budget versus DCF 1:1:3 /AV44 Significant Considerations ➢ Financial models are simply mathematics, the quality of the financial analysis is driven by the quality of the inputs and assumptions used ➢Users of the report should ensure they are comfortable with the assumptions outlined in the report, the assumptions will drive the results ➢Users should understand all scope limitations IQ* Scope Limitations ➢ Analysis based on services provided today ➢ Finance did not analyze the costs associated with a user pay system ➢ Finance did not review any potential impact to service levels from changing the current business model ➢ Operating and business practices were not reviewed for synergistic opportunities (i.e. route scheduling, manpower scheduling, etc.) Finance Department 90 8/18/2011 "10M W-- Key Assumptions ➢ Investment in Packers: ➢ 1 side loading 1 person packer, and 2 rear loading 2 person split packers ➢ Total Investment estimated to be $794,000 with 10 year useful life ➢ City Workers: ➢ 4 additional at skilled worker wage - $44,595 per year plus fringe ➢ Tipping Fees: ➢ Refuge Tonnage: 4,795 tons @ $108 ➢ Compost Tonnage: 1,364 tons @ $28 ➢ Vehicle Maintenance & Replacement ➢ 3 Packers @ 5,513 per month based on consultation with Fleet ➢ Average Maintenance $30K annually, lifecycle cost over 10 years Finance Department 91 8/18/2011 Assumptions Continued ➢ Fuel: ➢Current City Average Cost per Unit - $6.29 ➢Density Factor — 1.4 times the rate ➢9,267 units @ $8.81 ➢Contracted Rates: ➢Status Quo — based on call for bids for 9,267 units ➢Full Outsource — based on lowest expression of interest ➢Other Assumptions: ➢Contingency — 5% ➢Administrative Costs — 2% ➢Lost Time — based on experience ➢Fuel — 5% annual increase ➢ Inflation — 2% Finance Department 92 8/18/2011 Service HST Tota I Estimate /AV_ _., Alternative #1 versus Alternative #2 Net Incremental Savings Incremental Contractor Savings Incremental City Costs Quantity I Rate I Annual Cost 9,267 9,276 $15.40 $1,712,542 $58,740 9,276 $11,000 $1,771,282 $1,760,000 Net Incremental Savings Savings - $1,760,000 Costs - $172747000 Net Savings - $4867000 Finance Department City Workers Wages Benefits Ove rti m e Tipping Fees Refuge Compost Bulky Quantity Rate I Annual Cost 4 $45,000 $180,000 4 $11,000 $44,100 4 $1,725 $6,900 4 $57,725 $231,000 5000 $108 $540,000 1000 $28 $28,000 $32,000 $600,000 Vehicle Charges 1 3 1 $66,000 1 $198,000 Fuel Charges 1 9267 1 $9 1 $80,000 Other I 1 1 $108,000 Contingency 1 5% 1 1 $57,000 Tota I 1 $1,274, 000 93 8/18/2011 /AV_ _., Base Case Valuation Solid Waste Differential Cost Analysis DCF Rounded to nearest 000's Incremental Savings FERO contract Incremental Investment in Packers Incremental "In- House" Costs Tipping Fees for 9,267 units 4 FTE's - Solid Waste Fuel - 3 Packers Vehicle Charges - 3 Packers Estimated Lost Time - 4 FTE's Insurance Admin Contingency (5 %) Change in Working Capital Incremental "In- House" Savings Discounted "In- House" Savings (5.5 %) Cumulative "In- House" Discounted Savings Discounted Payback Period Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 $ - $ 1,760,000 $ 1,760,000 $ 1,760,000 $ 1,795,000 $ 1,831,000 $ - $ 1,760,000 $ 1,760,000 $ 1,760,000 $ 1,795,000 $ 1,831,000 $ (794,000) $ - $ (600,000) $ (612,000) $ (625,000) $ (637,000) $ (650,000) $ - $ (231,000) $ (238,000) $ (245,000) $ (253,000) $ (260,000) $ - $ (80,000) $ (84,000) $ (88,000) $ (92,000) $ (97,000) $ - $ (198,000) $ (202,000) $ (206,000) $ (211,000) $ (215,000) $ - $ (15,000) $ (15,000) $ (16,000) $ (16,000) $ (17,000) $ - $ (3,000) $ (3,000) $ (3,000) $ (3,000) $ (3,000) $ - $ (12,000) $ (12,000) $ (13,000) $ (13,000) $ (13,000) $ - $ (57,000) $ (58,000) $ (60,000) $ (61,000) $ (63,000) $ - $ (78,000) $ 4,000 $ 4,000 $ (1,000) $ (1,000) $ - $(1,274,000) $(1,220,000) $(1,252,000) $(1,287,000) $(1,319,000) $ (794, 000) $ 486,000 $ 540,000 $ 508,000 $ 508,000 $ 512,000 $ (794,000) $ 461,000 $ 485,000 $ 433,000 $ 410,000 $ 392,000 $ (794, 000) $ (333, 000) $ 152,000 $ 585,000 $ 995,000 $ 1,387,000 20.75 months Finance Department 94 8/18/2011 Risk Analysis • Based on a 5 year contract term, the financial risk of experiencing differences from the base assumptions within the model for the number of additional city workers required and percent contingency, is presented below: Finance Department 95 8/18/2011 Base Case Worst Case Best Case City Workers Conten enc 4 5% 6 10% 4 0% Average Savings 5 Year Valuation 5 Year Payback months $ 5105000 $ 1,387,000 21 $ 3215000 $ 582,000 31 $ 5707000 $1,631,000 19 Finance Department 95 8/18/2011 Recommendation • Based on the results of the financial model, Finance concludes that replacing current contracted services with a full "In- House" service model would achieve better value for money in Solid Waste Collection • Finance estimates replacing contracted services with City resources will reduce annual operating costs by approximately $500,000 with upside potential future savings in employee savings • Based on assumptions, Finance estimates value for money over a 5 year period of approximately $1.4M, with a payback on investment of 21 months Finance Department 96 8/18/2011 Objective 2: Full Outsource (Alternative #3) • Finance produced a financial analysis to compare a Full Outsource approach, based on rates established in the August 2010 "EOI", to the "In- House" model • Rates proposed in the expression are competitive. Based on the 7 year term, the "In- House" model produces a marginally higher value • However, given the inherent risk of assumptions, for all intents and purposes Finance deemed the result value neutral • A Permanent Reduction in workforce is the largest savings in an outsource model and must be achievable • If wishing to pursue this option, Finance recommends further due diligence be conducted Finance Department 97 8/18/2011 Due Diligence • If it is the desire of Council to further investigate the Outsource model, Finance recommends additional due diligence be conducted: — Feasibility of permanent employee reduction given collective agreement restrictions — City should seek long term certainty of rates beyond 7 years — Ensure transparent inflationary clauses — Understand the significant start up cost to re -enter solid waste service once divesting of all interest — Material changes in terms, conditions or assumptions will necessitate a refresh of the financial model • Accordingly, a risk management strategy should be prepared to identify, assess, and prioritize solid waste risks Finance Department 98 8/18/2011 Conclusion The financial report is based on a specific scope and specific assumptions which should be carefully reviewed, changes in scope and assumptions will drive changes to the analysis Finance estimates a positive business case for bringing current contracted routes "In- House" based on a call for bids, with an estimated value over 5 years of approximately $1.4 million, estimated annual reduction in operating expenses of approximately $500K and a payback period of 21 months. The worst case scenario also produces a positive business case Finance also reviewed the business case for a full outsource service model based on expressions of interest. The financial results are comparable to the "In- House" model over 7 years, however significant obstacles do exist. If interested in this option, further due diligence is required Finance Department 99 8/18/2011 REPORT TO COMMON COUNCIL M &C2011 -150 m, June 15", 2011 cam. His Worship Mayor Ivan Court And Members of Common Council The City of Saint John Your Worship and Members of Council, SUBJECT: COMMUNITY SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT SERVICE PURPOSE The purpose of this report is to provide an overview of the community's Solid Waste Management Service, a brief update on aspects of the service under review, and a context for changes being contemplated. BACKGROUND The Solid Waste Management Service is an essential community service - essential to public health, to quality of life in Saint John and to cleanliness of properties and streetscapes - provided in accordance with the provisions of A By -Law for the Storage, Collection and Disposal of Solid Waste in the City of Saint John (the Solid Waste By -Law). The service comprises seven basic elements: Residential Refuse Collection Collection /disposal of refuse from eligible households on a bi- weekly basis; currently weekly in priority neighbourhoods. 2. Residential Compost Collection Collection /disposal of compost from eligible households on a bi- weekly basis; currently weekly in priority neighbourhoods. 3. Blue Bin Recycling and Composting Promotion Promote participation in the Fundy Region's recycling and composting programs. 4. Litter Control Control street litter and efficiently service municipal litter containers placed at strategic locations around the city. 5. Special Activities Special service features, such as bulky item pick -up, white goods drop off, Christmas tree mulch, and neighbourhood clean -up initiatives. 6. Service Coordination and Consultation Maintaining the inventory of eligible residential customers, collection schedules and handling service needs of clients. 7. By -Law Administration and Public Education Administration of the By -Low and public education to promote waste diversion, with a particular focus on preventing and prosecuting illegal dumping. 100 COMMUNITY SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT SERVICE PAGE 2 REPORT TO COMMON COUNCIL, M &C 2011 -1 50 JUNE 15- 2011 Sustainability and Continuous Improvement Since establishment of the Fundy Region Solid Waste Commission in August 1995, the opening of the Crane Mountain Landfill facility in November 1997, and the introduction of region -wide composting in August 2001, solid waste management in Saint John has continued to evolve. Council has considered various reports over the years, including: • Residential Solid Waste Collection Service, M &C 2001 -95, March 22 ^d, 2001 • Integrated Resource and Solid Waste Management - Service, Sustainability, Costs and the Environment, M &C 2005-179, May 31't, 2005 • Solid Waste Management Service, M &C 2007 -328, November 28', 2007 • Same Week, Same Day - Solid Waste Service Implementation, M &C 2008 -258, August 28`h, 2008 • User Pay Option - Solid Waste Management Service, M &C 2009 -252, September 10", 2009 • Preliminary Estimates - Implementation of Curbside Recycling, M &C 2009- 329, October 15', 2009 Maintaining a clear focus on sustainability and continuous improvement is very important; increasing diversion to reduce expensive tipping fees for refuse, finding opportunities for more cost - effective delivery of service, improving public education, firmly enforcing landlord responsibilities for their waste management, continuing support of community clean -ups and redoubling efforts to eradicate illegal dumping. The fiscal challenges facing municipalities, coupled with a seemingly insatiable demand on limited public resources, require that services are prudently managed and that viable options to improve the output -cost equation are actively pursued. The underlying goal is to best provide for the real solid waste needs of the community. Current Service The City's 2011 budget for solid waste totals just over $4.1 million; with major (budget) cost factors being: • Vehicles - Usage /Fuel /Insurance $615,000 • Personnel $783,000 • Tipping Fees (Disposal) $810,000 • Contracted Collection Services $1,760,000 Collection of refuse and compost is provided for about 22,190 eligible residential households; the great majority (18,395 or 82.9 %) bi- weekly and 3,795 in the priority neighbourhoods on a weekly basis. In due course, the service should transition to an equivalent bi- weekly level of service to all residential households in the city. 101 COMMUNITY SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT SERVICE REPORT TO COMMON COUNCIL, M &C 2011 -1 50 ANALYSIS PAGE 3 JUNE 15- 2011 There are opportunities for positive change in the solid waste service - based on principles of sustainability, prudent financial management and responsibility on the part of every citizen and property owner. Council has also requested consideration of several ideas. In addition, solid waste services are among those being considered for regionalization by the Government of New Brunswick. Aspects of Service under Review Alternatives for Solid Waste Collection An operational and financial examination has been made of "in house" versus "contracted" collection options. The financial analysis compared three alternatives: [1 ] the status quo, the existing 64/36% split between internal and external collection; [2] bringing all collection "in house" and terminating the current contract arrangement; and [3] outsourcing all collection activity. There are several considerations involved in choosing among collection alternatives and certain factors limit the timing and /or viability of some options for the City of Saint John. A separate report (M &C 2011-89, dated June 17', 201 1) will follow. Limits for Household Refuse Saint John does not divert enough of the waste that it generates; too much goes out for garbage collection and ends up in the landfill. As a result, the costs of disposal (for taxpayers generally) are substantially higher than they could be. A recent report, considered at the June 6t' meeting of Council, outlined a "2 Bags or Less" voluntary pilot project being undertaken with 460 households in the Douglas Avenue area. Of the estimated 17,718 tonnes of residential waste generated in 2010, about 68.5% (12,152 tonnes) went into the landfill as refuse. The diverted waste comprised 3,359 tonnes of compost (19.0 %) and only 2,207 tonnes of recycled materials (12.5 %). This community can and must do better. User Pay and Sustainability Managing solid waste effectively at the best cost over the long term means truly embracing sustainability; practicing a philosophy that maximizes resource reuse, recycling and diversion, minimizes waste generation, and extends the service life of landfill infrastructure. A system of "user -pay" could be the key to encouraging individual responsibility for the cost of solid waste. Although there are good reasons for having a service like this one within the suite of those covered by property taxes, doing so does not encourage waste reduction or diversion; costs are not readily apparent to system users. Those who generate the most waste are not paying their fair share of the costs. Without a direct financial incentive to reduce waste, many people will not take personal responsibility to control costs. Council will probably need to consider a user -pay structure for solid waste at some future point. Priority Neighbourhoods (Level of Service) The interim higher level of service that priority neighbourhoods receive reflects substantive municipal support for those residents working to bring about positive change in these important areas of the city. The initiative was supported by the Human Development Council, Vibrant Communities 102 COMMUNITY SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT SERVICE PAGE 4 REPORT TO COMMON COUNCIL, M &C 2011 -1 50 JUNE 15-, 2011 and the Business Community Anti - Poverty Initiative. However, there is a cost associated with this higher level of service; one that cannot be justified indefinitely. A gradual transition to the standard bi- weekly level of service will be proposed - neighbourhood by neighbourhood. In some cases there will be difficult challenges to overcome in doing so. Mechanized Refuse (Cart) Handling The benefits of mechanized collection ( "black cart" system similar to compost) are many. Containers, possibly with a range of sizes, could be used to establish "limits" and pricing based on capacity. The greatest benefit, however, is in reduction of back injuries common to this type of work. Improved operating efficiency and tidier neighbourhoods could also be expected. Currently, everything from small plastic shopping bags to varying sizes and shapes of containers to loose and awkward refuse are placed for collection. Staff will caution Council, however, that the cost of procuring carts should be the responsibility of individual households and not be absorbed by the municipal (property tax) budget. Night Time Collection A night time collection "pilot" initiated several years ago has not proven itself. Potential benefits have been outweighed by certain challenges associated with night work. Citizens will be advised of the move away from night time collection in the South Central Peninsula. Should conditions change, the City could reconsider a broader policy of night time collection at some time in the future. Recycling Options Saint John is currently served by a depot recycling service operated by the Fundy Regional Solid Waste Commission. Citizens voluntarily bring their paper, cardboard, plastics and other recyclables to one of 13 strategically located Blue Bin depots in the city. Although the service is a good one, many citizens would prefer curbside recycling. Although more recyclables would probably be generated, a curb side service would also involve much higher operating costs and not pay for itself; the higher costs would not be offset by recycling revenues. Even the current system is subsidized by tipping fees for refuse. Finding the right recycling model for Saint John remains a work in progress; the balance of net costs and benefits will determine the most feasible approach for this community. Clean Neighbourhoods An important part of the solid waste service is working with citizens to clean -up neighbourhoods. Community groups are encouraged to take such initiatives and to make arrangements with Municipal Operations for the support needed. Service to Provincial Housing The City has come to provide service to a group of NB Housing properties and incur costs that rightfully rest with the Province. Staff has been in discussions with Provincial representatives to resolve this matter. By -Law and Enforcement Capability The Solid Waste By -Law is the foundation for the community's solid waste service. Beyond defining residential eligibility, it outlines standards for storage, handling and disposal of solid waste generally. The By -Law needs to be kept current and reflect modern thinking for a clean, healthy and liveable city; one that minimizes its ecological footprint, optimizes service outputs with costs, and strives 103 COMMUNITY SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT SERVICE PAGE 5 REPORT TO COMMON COUNCIL, M &C 2011 -1 50 JUNE 15- 2011 for long -term sustainability. It needs to be properly administered and communicated. Also vitally important is positive enforcement of its provisions. The City does not presently have the capability needed to effectively enforce the Solid Waste By -Law. Work on its update is underway, along with developing an effective solution for enforcement. Illegal Dumping /Placement Illegal dumping defiles the community; it is unhealthy, irresponsible, unlawful, and costly to taxpayers. It happens essentially in two ways. The first is the garbage, old appliances and furniture, and hazardous wastes dumped in out - of- the -way places, including watersheds and parklands. The other involves people ineligible for service, often as a result of inadequate provisions for garbage in their own buildings, placing garbage in front of eligible city households for pick -up. Eliminating this problem must be a high priority for the City - with public education and preventive measures, supported by the vigorous prosecution of offenders. Clean -Up Week Notwithstanding the popularity of Clean -Up Week, its price tag was very high and its demand on resources was disruptive to several essential spring time services. Analysis in 2001 strongly indicated that the program did not represent an effective use of limited public resources. More critical and seriously under funded programs, such as street, sidewalk and storm drainage system maintenance, could better utilize the dollars being spent on picking up and disposing of what was primarily "private refuse ". The cost of Clean -Up Week far outweighed the benefits gained. Annual Report Card A series of measureable improvement objectives, established for the service, will be reported on annually. This year's report has been drafted and will be presented to Council in the near future. Other Considerations Regionalization of Solid Waste Services As Council is aware, the 2008 Finn Report, "Building Stronger Local Governments and Regions ", recommended that solid waste management be designated as a `supra - municipal' service, to be handled exclusively on a regional basis: "Responsibility for the planning and management of the entire solid waste stream, from collection, to recycling, to disposal transferred to the regional service district." An integrated approach has merit. Given the current Government's plans for municipal reform, it would be prudent for the City to prepare itself for changes that could come to pass. Council needs to weigh the risks associated with making significant investments in the service prior to decisions on regionalization - against the benefits expected from the changes being made. Strikes /Work Stoppages Several communities across the country have experienced work stoppages that impacted their garbage collection; most notable among these being the City of Toronto. A 39 -day strike in 2009 produced serious difficulties for the municipality and its citizens. Among the consequences have been changing public opinions, the election of a new municipal council with strong points of view and a highly publicized debate on privatization of solid waste collection. On May 1 7t' of this year, 104 COMMUNITY SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT SERVICE PAGE 6 REPORT TO COMMON COUNCIL, M &C 2011 -1 50 JUNE 15- 2011 Toronto council voted conclusively to start a bidding process that could see private waste haulers collect garbage from some 165,000 households previously serviced by municipal equipment and employees; claiming potential to save millions of dollars. Saint John needs to be mindful of the effects a work stoppage can have on a service like solid waste; something not experienced here since 1981. Equipment and Mechanical Support Essential to reliable solid waste collection is the fleet of packers and the supporting maintenance resources to keep the equipment ready for the continuous daily schedule. Refuse and compost are collected five days a week, 52 weeks a year, statutory holidays included. The equipment is heavily used and can be subject to breakdown. As equipment availability is central to the service, there must be a built -in equipment reserve and the maintenance garage must operate an evening or night shift that keeps the packers in good repair, mobile and available for morning use. Working in Solid Waste Over the years, diligent managers and a fairly small group of stalwart employees have enabled the City to deliver a good "in house" solid waste collection service. Although much improved recently, there have been periods of considerable lost time from duty. Also, employment in "sanitation" is not attractive to the majority of workers; very few seek full time employment there. The "staffing" reality for this service can be a real challenge, making its delivery very difficult. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The Solid Waste Management Service is budgeted to cost taxpayers over $4.1 million in 2011. These costs are related directly to the amount of waste generated by residential households. Consistent with the goals of Plan SJ, the community can and must change. Being a clean, healthy and liveable city involves minimizing our ecological footprint, optimizing resource use, and achieving long -term sustainability. There is room for financial improvement in how the community and individual citizens manage solid waste. All concerned need to work hard to that end. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that Common Council receive and file this report. Respectfully submitted, J.M. Paul Groody, P.Eng. J. Patrick Woods, CGA Commissioner, City Manager Municipal Operations & Engineering 105 REPORT TO COMMON COUNCIL .�d w� 27 July 2011 city of saint John His Worship Ivan Court And Fellow Members of Common Council Your Worship and Councillors: SUBJECT: Standing Committee System Common Council has discussed the implementation of a standing committee system on a number of occasions. This governance model will be more efficient for Council, provide an opportunity for Councillors to develop a better understanding of the issues before them, allow Councillors to be more involved in setting the direction for the community and ultimately should improve the quality of our decision making. We need a commitment to have this model fully developed and a plan put in place for implementation for the incoming Council. It may also be beneficial to start the implementation process early in the New Year to allow for a smooth transition. Recommendation Resolved that the Common Clerk be directed to prepare the necessary By -law amendments and develop a timely process for implementation of a Standing Committee System. Respectfully submitted, C AT LARGE 106 I L( REPORT TO COMMON COUNCIL 27 July 2011 His Worship Ivan Court And Fellow Members of Common Council Your Worship and Councillors: SUBJECT: COUNCILBUDGET- SALARIES Common Council has decided that it has no appetite to reduce the number of Councillors citing the importance of citizen representation. My point in first raising the issue remains the same, the Council needs to show leadership and set an example in reducing costs. Leaving the number of Councillors the same and reducing the Council salaries by 40% would achieve the same financial result and still allow the desired level of representation. RECOMMENDATION: Resolved that the City Solicitor be directed to prepare the necessary By -law amendments to reduce the salaries of Council by forty percent beginning in January 2012. Respectfully submitted, Christopher Ti COUNCILLOR AT LARGE 107 � . Z- REPORT TO COMMON COUNCIL 27 July 2011 His Worship Ivan Court And Fellow Members of Common Council Your Worship and Councillors: SUBJECT: Sydney St. Courthouse The Sydney St. Courthouse will likely be vacated in due course with the opening of the new Courthouse at Peel Plaza. This is a prominent building in the City core with considerable historical significance. It would likely fall into disrepair if it were to be left unoccupied for any length of time. The City should explore the possibility of acquiring this property and what other use(s) it may serve should the Province of New Brunswick declare it surplus to their needs. Recommendation Resolved that the City Manager be directed to investigate the possible acquisition of the Sydney St Courthouse from the Province of New Brunswick and report back on a timely basis. Respectfully submitted, Christ er Titus CO 0 OR AT LARGE 1: REPORT TO COMMON COUNCIL M &C -2011 —222 August 24, 2011 His Worship Mayor Ivan Court and Members of Common Council Your Worship and Councillors: SUBJECT: Proposed Public Hearing Date 1 Plaza Avenue 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 application has been received. Name of Location Existing Proposed Reason Applicant Zone Zone City of Saint John Sobeys 1 Plaza Avenue "I4" "SC" To permit an Developments employee parking area RECOMMENDATION: That Common Council schedule the public hearing for the rezoning application of Sobeys Developments (1 Plaza Avenue) for Monday, September 26, 2011 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber, and refer the application to the Planning Advisory Committee for report and recommendation. Respectfully submitted, orrest, MCIP, RPP and Development 109 J. Patrick Woods, CGA City Manager REPORT TO COMMON COUNCIL M & C — 2011 -228 August 26, 2011 His Worship Mayor Ivan Court and Members of Common Council Your Worship and Councillors: City of Saim John SUBJECT: INITIATE STOP -UP AND CLOSE SOUTHERN TIP OF WATER STREET BACKGROUND: The subject parcel of land comprising an area of approximately 645 square metres is beyond the area that is presently utilized for the travelled portion of Water Street; in fact it is beyond the fenced area and is within the confines of the land that is utilized by the Saint John Port Authority. The purpose of this street closure is to facilitate a land transaction with the Port Authority that would see this parcel swapped to the Port for a desired, similar sized parcel to be utilized for the construction of Lift Station #9 as part of the Harbour Cleanup project. Municipal Operations are supportive of this street closure and subsequent land exchange. A further report will be prepared for Council on the particulars of the land transaction once the details are finalized. The recommendation contained in this report will facilitate the process to initiate the street closure of the subject property. RECOMMENDATION: 1. That the Public Hearing for the consideration of the passing of a By -law to Stop Up and Close a 645 square metre f portion of a public street known as Water Street, be set for Monday, September 26, 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 Attachment CL /c 110 J. Patrick Woods, C.G.A. City Manager 776 rue Qug�, tT c 247 .: ol, w r 7�y10� 0 CD 2 r r r 91 3 e U) A �Sl (augers rue . dame St• rue .7a . 'Ross st . rue a„ S. f �' Queen S4 n 7M ° 1 Description of Plan: To stop -up and close the southern tip of Water Street N PID: N/A Address: Portion of Water Street Pan: N/A Date: August 24, 2011 111 fC9 Z JIi `� n - p i °oi��' ®� > u3353c43 BiSiiii•N ad c� FE Qin 3 2 1 f • "y e 6 e 2 E� .E Z t1 nnnR ' c K 'm ° R�7 °g bl F Ji §1•°€ fi ��.d' v c yp c F g r °€ 8 • ao R� eB •� a $�mS�boEn_ oB��o n. $�B p-7°. m o °�z O ?o —.4m u ° 9$ �E �' aE gg= �Ss€ n���nn v� •z� 0°3 d $ F yjfa �€ �` y off= 8 96 E3P :� rr•nrnn rnnn nnn n.s `O lon_EE wn ,i C°° .g9 '$2c 6 .�•N� •°-w° b ?gyp �Cn�cr Em S'v ""�. °a v °� •� °� � �> x° �� $ i/l rn t'o v o z °� •� g�,�� � � �_` a o a9n° g�Yl gall 5 5'1g f3 f g c� SE x Z °om ° Hr nHr H «rNrvN «rvaN� or .S c v o� • �• �3 u a 5� U ° 'j d Eg �_ Se g'� 8 V7 c °� Sg B +h 6a m �> T,.� `$ m 'E ' v� i $E° S�'6-0N' zb mnnn C �•v dm wa+ we w�we W-gon` Stree�IRUe P�1�ae e William Prime et � 9 z d i" z e r� �65i a Y ` 8 �a D o d ° � E v �v N3 �a ti ritY Pa,o,la.i.oPo�r��A tho P °�M� r��d Saint rtv.,a.�� Qae du°CUrad °fie •� �d� Lehr ule�• gee 9°t lnN U con ub 7 N+•° D°� Ld, PP ww 112 B / S 2 u 06S YCq Z m Q y Z b P / 19 to F oqy ON z ; a:: s • a ea:e� ie� g `��•.�vasfas,ga o�� viali "a�:sB'ss m J II ,I 1 ��I��N�I �1�0�•4 REPORT TO COMMON COUNCIL M &C- 2011 -225 August 24, 2011 His Worship Mayor Ivan Court and Members of Common Council Your Worship and Councillors: SUBJECT: Hitachi Crescent Subdivision - Galbraith Construction Limited BACKGROUND: City of Saim John On March 1, 2010 and March 11, 2011 Common Council assented to the vesting of the proposed street and revised land for public purposes as well as any necessary municipal services easements and public utility easements with respect to the Hitachi Crescent Subdivision. The subdivision, located off of Gault Road will contain approximately 34 townhouse units. Common Council also authorized the preparation and execution of one or more City / Developer Subdivision Agreements to ensure provision of the required work and facilities. The Developer, Galbraith Construction Limited, has provided the Final Plan of Subdivision for the first phase of the development and the City is currently awaiting execution of the City / Developer Subdivision Agreement. In addition to these requirements, the subdivision contains a storm water retention pond which is required to be conveyed to the City. Conveyance of the storm water management pond is an additional requirement beyond endorsement of the Final Plan of Subdivision and execution of the City / Developer Subdivision Agreement. The acceptance of the transfer of the lands on which the storm water retention pond is located, shown as "Parcel A" on the attached plan of subdivision, requires a resolution of Common Council. 113 M & C — 2011 — 225 - 2 - August 24, 2011 ANALYSIS: Planning and Development staff has consulted with the Legal Department regarding the land transfer and the Developer has agreed to the terms and conditions and wishes to make the conveyance. The transfer of Parcel "A" will be subject to the following terms: 1) Title to Parcel "A" to be unencumbered freehold title; 2) Title to be acquired upon completion of the Developer's work to the satisfaction of the Chief City Engineer of The City of Saint John; and 3) All costs associated with the transfer are to be borne by the Developer. Following completion of the work required by the City to the satisfaction of the Chief City Engineer, receipt of the executed Subdivision Agreement and receipt of the transfer documentation and applicable filing and registration fees, the Development Officer will endorse the Final Plan of Subdivision. RECOMMENDATION: That The City of Saint John accept from Galbraith Construction Limited, at the said Company's cost and expense, a Transfer in registerable form of the unencumbered freehold title to Parcel "A" on Subdivision Plan, "Hitachi Crescent Subdivision - Phase 1, Gault Road, City of Saint John, Saint John County, N.B." dated July 20, 2011 upon completion of the work required by the City being satisfactory to the Chief City Engineer." Respectfully submitted, Ken Forrest, MCIP, RPP Commissioner Planning and Development J. Patrick Woods, CGA City Manager MR Project No. 10 -13 114 L f� s ° d a a.c� �W m $ o p b rob( p q ���,$U����a qP�����4� i C o Y y"jo qqB R �" °raj 55" P P t O ° ° �'6 obi «44 v I '�•�� F�� �_.:����$;gf�� � 999 �� �� }F � O_> Uc �— g� 1 lRRg1�B1 fan = N Jy0 4 \1 .7 Y F 1 �3 q o 'S7 y `, •' u y , w �6 E nggn uH & Q IM �� a o j` E8 R �a "° pill! Q �' 94 g � i �m691Bm_Sb aa®®gyyggsyylgg ay,. K :R: 4MO ° 6 N ° Ly IOROB'00" 71.]9 / ° T • 1 les9e'9n• � n t era e'a9 ]1.37 •� °i A5! tetea'YY9' U'� ]1.46 1-4 1M% 1, al: lee•oe'a�y ��ry 31.77 d :3 HPviN.�•ry 1eYroe'oo' 166'06'00' 31.4e0 �' L6rez .OS.OSEte OreL� Jy0 4 \1 .7 Y F 1 �3 q o 'S7 y `, •' y , w �6 Q �� •' d,d , R Nom} •: J,Y $ ci a!u "too, .o�� cQlurr` • �` t+ N ° Ly IOROB'00" 71.]9 / ° T • 1 les9e'9n• � n t era e'a9 ]1.37 •� °i A5! tetea'YY9' ]1.46 1-4 1M% 1, al: lee•oe'a�y �.. 31.77 d :3 ]1A6 r '° 1eYroe'oo' 166'06'00' 31.4e0 �' L6rez .OS.OSEte OreL� 6L .9sAS.61f - w IOreL a - - -- . {Y9L ,OC.00.Bff Q OC.OSd1C •••LS')L ,OC,DSb .OS.OS,6*E °:,°6.;�tt►a�.n�t mww ,tom Ppo�j 1Inpo a o da�aR_ y1M Rim dda.R.-ry s�748��� ' °R�p1RS:Si���XiAYIF91R��g v to ; 111 1117 s Mumunow o it ,�An N R A 4 WR ;RgRnRRRRRRBIB:7Y7S ^ +14WS�;2pa9 960£ r J p spar sa i At.1a E' L t � •Y id !a �^ g ,�\ a 019C0Y Old 'D41 uoAorjSWOQ MDJgIDD l7 L i0 U 9y 14y O,. J yj u 5 m B � y E m o ao o� ° t•• N i7 115 REPORT TO COMMON COUNCIL M & C — 2011 -220 26 August 2011 His Worship Ivan Court and Members of Common Council Your Worship and Councillors: SUBJECT: Tender for 18 Scott Air Packs and Accessories Saint John Fire Department BACKGROUND: Tenders have been received for the purchase of eighteen (18) Scott Health and Safety Self Contained Breathing Air Packs and Accessories. The City of Saint John Fire Department has seventy -two self - contained breathing apparatus (air packs) in its inventory for daily use and regional hazardous materials emergency response deployment. It is the employment of air packs that permit fire fighters to be in situations which humans could not normally survive (i.e. heavy smoke, noxious gases, etc). To ensure fire fighter safety, air packs are constructed and tested to the most current edition of the National Fire Protection Association's Standard on Open - Circuit Self- Contained Breathing Apparatus (SCBA) for Emergency Services (NFPA 1981). This standard is updated every five years, with 2007 being the most recent edition and 2012 being the next planned edition of NFPA 1981. Traditionally, the Fire Department has purchased packs midway to the end of the five -year edition cycle. The reasons are two folds; first to avoid any unplanned "issues" with any new features on the air pack; and secondly, the unit cost sometimes drops after the first year or two of the new edition. 116 PAGE TWO The Fire Department purchased approximately 60 air packs in the 1999 to 2002 time - frame. These air packs were configured to the 1997 Edition of NFPA 1981. Additional air packs have since been purchased to replace severely damaged air packs as well as support the entry into regional hazardous materials emergency response service. As Council is aware, the Fire Department maintains, repairs and upgrades its own air packs, continually extending the useful life of the packs. Of the seventy -two air packs in use, 36 air packs conform to NFPA 1981, 2007 Edition (12 purchased and 24 previously upgraded), while 36 air packs are still configured to the 1997 Edition. Each edition of NFPA 1981 brings with it either new safety features and/ or improvements to primary functions. Similarly, these improvements usually entail longer part life or easier parts replacements. As part of the 2011 capital equipment program, the Fire Department planned to upgrade 20 of the remaining 36 packs to the 2007 Edition of NFPA 1981. The upgrade would have entailed the replacement of defunct /costly parts and the addition of new safety features. But with the upgrade, you still have the same metal frame, the same straps and the same basic mechanisms, which are still nine to twelve years old and subject to fatigue. The metal frame alone costs over $1000.00 to replace. Recently, the gap between the cost of the upgrade parts and the cost of a new air pack closed significantly. This is due in part to the value of the Canadian Dollar and the pending release of the next edition of NFPA 1981. With just a $700 difference between purchasing new and upgrading, the logical choice is to replace new (i.e. full life expectancy from the unit). The Fire Department is now proposing to replace 18 air packs as opposed to upgrading 20. Based on the funds allocated for the project, it is proposed that 18 of the NFPA 1981, 1997 Edition air packs be decommissioned and replaced with 18 air packs purchased to 2007 Edition. As a related benefit, parts from the decommissioned air packs will be used to sustain the 18 air packs still "built" to NFPA 1981, 1997 Edition (until their eventual upgrade or replacement). 117 PAGE THREE ANALYSIS: Four companies responded to the City's tender call by submitting bids. Staffs of the Saint John Fire Department and Materials and Fleet Management have reviewed the bids and have found them all to be complete in every regard. A summary is enclosed for Council's consideration. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: If awarded as recommended, to the lowest bidder, the estimated total cost for the 18 Scott Air Packs and accessories will be $83,142.00 plus tax. This is a planned expenditure and as such funds are included in the 2011 Capital Budget for Fire Equipment. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the tender submitted by Safety Source Ltd. in the amount of $83,142.00 plus tax, for the supply and delivery of 18 Scott Air Packs and accessories be accepted. Respectfully submitted, 0—j 9-- , David Logan Purchasing Agent /Manager Patrick Woods City Manager 118 REPORT TO COMMON COUNCIL M & C — 2011 -227 26 August, 2011 His Worship Mayor Ivan Court & Members of Common Council Your Worship and Councillors: SUBJECT: Tender for Plow Blades and Edges BACKGROUND: The City called a tender for the establishment of a supply agreement for the provision of plow blades and cutting edges used in snow clearing operations. Eight companies responded to this tender call, which closed on Wednesday, August 17, 2011. ANALYSIS: The tender bids have been reviewed by staff of Materials & Fleet Management and Municipal Operations. All tenders are complete in every regard. The summary of the tenders is enclosed for Council's consideration. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: The purpose of this tender is for the establishment of a supply agreement for plow blades and cutting edges for winter snow plowing and removal. The actual requirement for these items is very much influenced by the type and duration of the coming winter months and therefore is difficult to predict with any degree of accuracy. The tender however, is divided into two requirements. The first of these is an initial order amount that is needed to replenish existing stocks. This requirement is illustrated by the quantities contained on the enclosed summary and based on the prices offered, if awarded as recommended, will total $27,120.56 plus tax. The second requirement covers future needs, if any, and is established on an as and when required basis. This tender represents a yearly requirement and as such, funds are included in the annual operating budget. 119 Page Two RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the tender for the establishment of a supply agreement for plow blades and edges from date of award until March 31, 2012 be awarded to the low bidder, LSW Wear Parts Ltd., Fredericton, N. B. as per the prices quoted and illustrated on the enclosed summary. Respectfully submitted, David Logan Purchasing Agent Patrick Woods City Manager 120 City of Saint John Tender Summary 2011-259001T Plow Blades and Edges ( * *) Indicates Recommendation 121 JOE ITE DESCRIPTION INITIAL LETCO CHEMUNG KENNA- SMS ALPHA LSW ** JOHNSO BRC M# ORDER QTY LTD. SUPPLY METAL EQUIP EQUIP WEAR N EQUIP BLADES 1 36" (Carbon Tip) 38 $180.75 $175.92 $173.47 ** $ 172.69 $ 212.46 $ 153.88 ** $ 232.64 $ 168.92 2 48" (carbon Tip) 76 $220.65 $ 234.56 $ 228.68 ** $ 230.26 $ 283.15 $ 204.44 ** $ 280.49 $ 225.22 3 132" Cutting Edge 38 $279.00 $ 125.40 NO BID $ 147.28 $ 177.28 $ 120.00 ** $ 367.02 NO BID 2 Piece Cutting Edge - 4 Flipable 5/8" x 8 16 $108.00 $ 76.02 NO BID $ 112.36 $ 295.64 $ 73.48 ** $ 162.84 NO BID 5 144" Cutting Edge - NO BID $ 136.80 NO BID $ 160.67 $ 189.54 $ 130.84 ** NO BID NO BID 6 96" Cutting Edge - NO BID $ 91.20 NO BID $ 107.11 $ 126.40 $ 87.15 ** NO BID NO BID Blades for John Deere Grader: 7 Blade PT# T66703 - NO BID NO BID NO BID $ 105.98 $101.61 $ 94.40 ** NO BID NO BID Overlays PT# 6Y/2805 - NO BID NO BID NO BID $ 108.56 NO BID $101.10 ** NO BID NO BID 60 Days Ist DELIVERY 4 Weeks 21 Days 60 Days 5 Weeks 6 Weeks 3 -4 1 Month order Weeks ** 5 Days for rest ( * *) Indicates Recommendation 121 REPORT TO COMMON COUNCIL M &C2011 -213 August 24, 2011 His Worship Mayor Ivan Court and Members of Common Council Your Worship and Members of Council: SUBJECT: Contract 2011 -20: Chip Seal - 2011 BACKGROUND 71r � I The City of Saint john The 2011 General Fund Operating Budget included a provision for the chip sealing of a number of roads in the City. This is an annual program to maintain the City's inventory of existing chip seal roads. The work consists generally of the supply of all necessary labour, materials and equipment for the placement of approximately 9883 m2 of single coat chip seal surface treatment on various roads. There are a total of 5 roads in this contract as follows: Bay Crescent Drive from Woodside Drive to Dead End Camp Court from Chalmers Drive to Dead End Chalmers Drive from Woodside Drive to Bay Crescent Drive Clairmont Street from Rothesay Road to End of Chip Seal Woodside Drive from Westfield Road to Bay Crescent Drive TENDER RESULTS Tenders closed on August 10, 2011 with the following results: 1) 624091 Alberta Ltd. o/a R &N Maintenance, Guelph Ontario $ 48,042.03 2) Maritime Road Recycling Inc., Grand Falls, NB $ 72,164.46 3) Moncton Construction Inc., Saint Jacques, NB $ 72,722.85 4) Industrial Cold Milling Ltd., Moncton, NB $ 94,500.04 The Engineer's estimate for the work was $ 92,240.00. 122 M &C2011 -213 August 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 tender submitted by 624091 Alberta Ltd. o/a R &N Maintenance. Division 2 — Instructions to Tenderers and Tendering procedures of the 2011 General Specifications at — Clause 2.11(a) Reserved Rights states: - "The City reserves the right to: Reject an unbalanced Tender. For the purpose of this section, an unbalanced tender containing a unit price which deviates substantially from, or does not fairly represent reasonable and proper compensation for the unit of work bid or one that contains prices which appear to be so unbalanced as to adversely affect the interest of the City. The City Reserves the right to use tenders submitted in response to this Request for Tender or for other like or similar work as a guideline in determining if a bid is unbalanced." Staff has determined that the tender submitted by 624091 Alberta Ltd. o/a R &N Maintenance was an unbalanced Tender and should be rejected in accordance with Clause 2.11(a). Staff is of the opinion that the lowest compliant tenderer, Maritime Road Recycling Inc. has the necessary expertise and resources to perform the work, and recommend acceptance of their tender. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS This contract includes work that is charged against the 2011 General Fund Operating Budget. Assuming award of the contract to Maritime Road Recycling Inc. staff completed an analysis that concluded that a total of $100,000.00 was provided in the General Fund Operating Budget and the projected completion cost is estimated to be $66,052.07, including the City's eligible H.S.T. rebate — a positive difference of $33,947.93 in the General Fund Operating Budget. POLICY — TENDER OF CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS The recommendation in this report is made in accordance with the provisions of Council's policy for the tendering of construction contracts, the most current version of the City's General Specifications and the specific project specifications. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that Contract 2011 -20: Chip Seal - 2011, be awarded to the lowest compliant tenderer, Maritime Road Recycling Inc. at the tendered price of $72,164.46 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 123 J. Patrick Woods, CGA City Manager REPORT TO COMMON COUNCIL M &C2011 -224 August 23, 2011 His Worship Mayor Ivan Court And Members of Common Council Your Worship and Members of Council, SUBJECT: Contract 2011— 24: Crack Sealing - 2011 BACKGROUND: 71n 7 The City of Saint John The 2011 General Fund Operating Budget included a provision for the crack sealing of the asphalt pavement on Rothesay Avenue between McLean Street and McAllister Drive. The work consists generally of cleaning the asphalt pavement cracks by high velocity blowers and immediately filling the cracks with a hot rubberized joint sealing compound which adheres and seals the cracks in asphalt pavements. A sprinkle of cement or agricultural lime is then applied to prevent tracking of the sealant by vehicular traffic. The total length of asphalt cracks to be sealed is approximately 10,000 metres. TENDER RESULTS: Tenders closed on August 17, 2011 with the following results: 1. Road Savers Maritime Limited, Chester, N.S. $40,115.00 2. Morin Curbing Inc., Drummond N.B. $42,375.00 3. 624091 Alberta Ltd. o/a R & N Maintenance, Guelph, Ontario $42,827.00 The Engineer's estimate for the work was $50,000.00 ANALYSIS: Three tenders were reviewed by the Tender Opening Committee and 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. 124 M &C 2011 - 224 August 23, 2011 Page 2 FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: There is $50,000.00 provided for crack sealing in the 2011 General Fund Operating Budget. The projected completion cost is estimated to be $36,717.32 including the City's eligible H.S.T. Rebate — a $13,282.78 positive difference in the General Fund Operating Budget. This Contract is prepared in such a way that the quantity of work can be increased or decreased without penalty. Staff will monitor the progress of the work and maintain the expenses to the budget allocation. POLICY — TENDERING OF CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS The recommendation in this report is made in accordance with the provisions of Council's policy for the tendering of construction contracts, the City's General Specifications and the specific project specifications. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that Contract 2011 -24: Crack Sealing - 2011, be awarded to the low tenderer, Road Savers Maritime Limited, at the tendered price of $40,115.00 as calculated based upon estimated quantities, and further that the Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to execute the necessary contract documents. Respectfully submitted, J. M. Paul Groody, P.Eng. Commissioner, Municipal Operations & Engineering J. Patrick Woods, CGA City Manager 125 REPORT TO COMMON COUNCIL M &C2011 -226 August 25, 2011 His Worship Mayor Ivan Court & Members of Common Council Your Worship and Members of Council, 71r � I The City of Saint john SUBJECT: Contract No. 2011 -4 — Millidge Ave., Skaling Court, Woodward Avenue and Black St. — Storm Sewer Separation BACKGROUND To address flooding issues related to stormwater in the Brentwood Drainage Basin, Common Council adopted the recommendations from the "Millidgeville Stormwater Management — Brentwood Drainage Basin" report (M &C 2010 -180, May 25, 20 10) as follows: 1. Council authorize staff to proceed with the design and construction of the following Associated Works items: a. Relocate Boars Head outfall at Caledonia Bk, b. Disconnect and re -route (2) Air Canada storm sewers directly to Caledonia Bk, c. Re- profile ditch along Woodward Ave, install cross culvert and redirect catch basins at Cedar Point, and d. Disconnect six(6) of the twelve(12) catch basins from the sanitary sewers. 2. Initiate the Environmental Impact Assessment process for the full six detention ponds. This work must be carried out during the summer months when vegetation is in bloom. 3. Authorize staff to negotiate with CBCL Limited for engineering design and construction management services for the above work. On September 27, 2010 (M &C 2010 -320) Council adopted the recommendation to engage CBCL Limited to carry out the engineering design and construction management services for the Brentwood Drainage Basin Storm Sewer Improvements which included the Associated Work items and the Environmental Impact Assessment described above. 126 M &C 2011 — 226 August 25, 2011 Page 2 PURPOSE The purpose of this report is to make a recommendation for the award of a storm sewer separation project in Millidgeville identified in the Background section of this report under item Ld) and including: Millidge Avenue between Hayward Court and Daniel Avenue, Millidge Avenue at Reed Street, Black Street at Alward, Woodward Avenue at Civic #298, and the easement from Woodward Avenue to Skaling Court. TENDER RESULTS Tenders closed on August 24, 2011, with the following results: 1. Fairville Construction Ltd., Saint John, NB $ 291,977.31 2. Galbraith Construction Ltd., Saint John, NB $ 292,214.61 3. Dexter Construction Company Limited, Moncton, NB $ 321,498.56 4. H.E. Merchant and Sons Ltd., St. George, NB $ 336,465.41 5. Maguire Excavating Ltd., Saint John, NB $ 471,023.15 The Engineer's estimate for the work was $323,090.73. ANALYSIS Six tenders were received and reviewed by the Tender Opening Committee and all tenders were found to be formal in all respects with the exception of one, which was non compliant as they failed to initial a change in price in the form of tender. The tender was rejected in accordance with Division 2 — Instructions to Tenderers and Tendering Procedures, Section 2.8.03 i). Staff is of the opinion that the lowest compliant tenderer has the necessary resources and expertise to perform the work, and recommend acceptance of their tender. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The cost of the work from CBCL Limited to provide engineering design and construction management services, and carry out the EIA for the detention ponds is approximately $375,201 including the City's eligible HST rebate. A further $241,397.65 including the City's eligible H.S.T. rebate was approved for Contract 2010 -29 - Woodward Avenue — Boars Head Road to Conifer Crescent — Storm Drainage Improvements to complete Associated Works item Lc) identified above under the Background section. An amount of $1,035,000 was approved in the 2010 and 2011 General Fund Capital Programs for these projects. The remaining budget $418,401.35 ($1,035,000 - $375,201 - $241,397.65) will be used for tendering and construction of the remaining Associated Works items La) and Lb) listed above under the Background section of this report. 127 M &C 2011 — 226 August 25, 2011 Page 3 Assuming award of the Contract to the lowest compliant tenderer, an analysis has been completed which includes the estimated amount of work on this project that will be performed by City forces and others. The analysis concludes that an amount of $418,401.35 is available in the budget and that the cost of this project is estimated to be $269,246.57 including the City's eligible H.S.T. rebate - a $149,154.78 positive difference in the General Fund Capital Program that will be used to tender and construct the remaining Associated Works items. 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 2011 -4: Millidge Ave., Skaling Court, Woodward Avenue and Black St. — Storm Sewer Separation be awarded to the lowest compliant tenderer, Fairville Construction Ltd. at their tendered price of $291,977.31 as calculated based upon estimated quantities, and further that the Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to execute the necessary documents. Respectfully submitted, J. M. Paul Groody, P.Eng. Commissioner Municipal Operations & Engineering J. Patrick Woods, CGA City Manager 128 REPORT TO COMMON COUNCIL August 25, 2011 The City of Saint John Mayor Ivan Court and Members of Common Council Your Worship and Members of Council: SUBJECT: Sales Engagement Confidentiality Agreement (Non Disclosure Agreement) between the City and Taleo. BACKGROUND: In 2009, the City entered into an agreement with Canadian application service provider Cytiva Software for the provision of certain services related to the management of employee performance appraisals. Cytiva Software was recently acquired by the U.S. firm Taleo and the City is performing its due diligence with respect to ensuring that the personal information of City employees is protected against risks, including unauthorized access, use, disclosure or destruction, We have requested from Taleo a copy of an auditor's report known as an SAS 70 report. These auditor's reports are one of several mechanisms which can be used to evaluate an application service provider's control environment and offer some assurance of both information security and privacy. Taleo has agreed to share this auditor's report but first requires that the City sign a Non Disclosure Agreement. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that Common Council authorize the Mayor and Common Clerk to sign the Sales Engagement Confidentiality Agreement (Non Disclosure Agreement) between the City and Taleo. Respectfully submitted, David Burke Privacy, Access, Records & Information Management Officer City of Saint John Elizabeth Gormley Common Clerk City of Saint John 129 ThIeo • ., SALES ENGAGEMENT CONFIDENTIALITY AGREEMENT 1. Purpose. Taleo and Company desire to disclose Confidential Information to one another in the context of a sales evaluation for the potential purchase of products and services by Company from Taleo (the "Sales Cycle "). 2. Confidentiality Obligation. This agreement governs the information disclosed by one party or its agents (collectively the "Disclosing Party ") to the other party or its agents (collectively the "Receiving Party") during the Sales Cycle, including disclosures prior to the execution of this agreement. "Confidential Information" includes information marked as confidential or designated as confidential at the time of disclosure. With respect to Taleo, "Confidential Information" includes, without limitation, sales p resentations, responses to requests for proposals /information, pricing and price quotes, product documentation (including software hosting and security practices), product demonstrations (including screen shots from such demonstrations), and product functionality not available except by use of a 1 ogin and password. Confidential Information does not include any information that (i) is or becomes publicly available through no fault of the Receiving Party, (ii) is known by the Receiving Party without restriction at the time of its receipt from the Disclosing Party, (iii) is received from a third party who did not acquire such information by a wro ngful or tortious act, or (i v) is or has been i ndependently developed by the Receiving Party without use of any Disclosing Party Confidential Information. The Disclosing Party does not make any representations or warranties as to the accuracy or completeness of any Disclosing Party Confidential Information. The Receiving Party will not disclose the Disclosing Party Confidential Information to anyone (who is not an employee of the City of Saint John) and will use Confidential Information only in pursuance of the Sales Cycle. For the av oidance of doubt, Taleo Confidential Information may not be shared with competitive bidders participating in a competitive sales cycle. The Receiving Party's obligations with respect to the Disclosing Party's Confidential Information will survive for three (3) years from the date of this agreement. 3. Return of Confidential Information. The Receiving Party will return or destroy all tangible materials embodying Disclosing Party Confidential Information (in any form and including, without limitation, all summaries, copies and excerpts of Confidential Information) promptly following the Disclosing Party's written request, retaining no copies of the same. At the Disclosing Party's option, the Receiving Party will provide written certification of its compliance with this provision. 4. Miscellaneous. The parties have executed this agreement as of the d ate last written below. This agreement may be executed in counterparts and by facsimile, each of which shall be deemed to be an original, and all of which together shall constitute one and the same agreement. An y handwritten changes to the above provisions of this agreement shall render the agreement immediately null and void. Taleo Corporation ,:=J-- CVK 4j�;e�r By: Name: Josh Faddis Title: Vice President & Corporate Counsel (write Company name above) Signature: Print Name: Title: Date: EXECUTION INSTRUCTIONS: After execution of this agreement, please fax to 925 - 452 -3027 (Attn: Legal) and retain a copy for your records. 130 Campaign Cabinet Medical Education Trust Supporting a medical student's education yields Chair Donald Craig, MD substantial results in physician recruitment. Michael Doyle, FCA August 24,201 1 Kelly Duplisea, VP Bell Aliant Dr. Donald Craig, Chair Nathalie Godbout, LLB Mayor Ivan Court, Councillors and Common Clerk David Huestis Common Clerk's Office Allison Kennedy, MD City of Saint John, Gerald Maloney, MD P.O. Box 1971 David Marr, MD Saint John, NB Jeanne McNeill, MD John Quinn, MD Dear Ms. Gormley, Common Clerk of the City of Saint John Tony Wade, MD As you are by now aware, the medical education programs offered by Dalhousie Medicine New Brunswick in Saint John and Universite de Sherbrooke in Moncton are finally a reality. But these programs are new, and do not have a history of fundraising and endowments from which to offer scholarships and bursaries to undergraduate medical students. That's why the New Brunswick Medical Education Trust was established with the specific goal of providing bursaries to medical students who intend to set up practice in New Brunswick following completion of their studies. As a member of the Saint John New Brunswick community, you recognize the importance of making an investment in the future of healthcare in our city by making it possible for the Trust to support these future physicians who will provide access to medical care for the citizens of Saint John . As you see daily in the local press , thousands of people in our city are denied access to a family doctor. It is my privilege to Chair this campaign for the New Brunswick Medical Education Trust. Our goal is to try to retain many of the medical graduates from Dalhousie Med NB to stay in our community to replace our retiring physicians. At this time I am requesting formally to make a presentation to the Council of the City of Saint John at your earliest convenience, possibly August 29,2011 if that is possible. Martha Zed Sincerely, Campaign Director New Brunswick Medical Education Trust Z PO Box 2100 400 University Ave. Entrance Lobby, Level One Dr. Donald Craig, Chair Saint John, NB E2L 4L2 Saint John, New Brunswick Medical Education Trust 87 Martha.Zed @HorizonNB.ca www.NBMedTrust.ca 131 Mayor Ivan Court Mayor's Office Bureau du maire SAINT JOHN WHEREAS: PROCLAMATION This is the United Way's 52nd year of helping those in need; and WHEREAS: there are 25- member agencies of the United Way who provide essential services to those in need in the community; and WHEREAS: over 250,000 needed units of service are provided to citizens in the counties of Saint John, Kings and Charlotte annually; and WHEREAS: over $33 million has been invested to support programs and services in our co munity; NOW THEREFORE: I, Mayor Ivan Court, - _ of Saint John do hereby proclaim Thursday, September 1st, 2011 as "United Way Day" for the United Way of Greater Saint John Inc. I encourage everyone in our community to support the United Way and the 25- member agencies which provide services necessary in our community. The annual campaign is truly a community effort with labor, business, community leaders, non- profit organizations and numerous volunteers working to improve the lives of those in our community. In witness whereof I have set my hand and affixed official seal of the Mayor of the City of Saint John. P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, NB Canada E2L 4L1 www.saintjohn.ca C 132 The City of Saint John Mayor Ivan Court Mayor's Office Bureau du maire SAINT JOHN --�. PROCLAMATION WHEREAS: the Port of Saint John hosts in excess of eight hundred foreign vessels each year carrying approximately thirty million tonnes of cargo; and WHEREAS: the Saint John Seafarers Mission administers to visiting crew members through its amenities at Tilley Lane, Market Place West; and WHEREAS: the welfare of ships crews is paramount to the efficient transportation of goods by sea and the global economy; and WHEREAS: in recognition of the role of seafarers to global trade and the safe and efficient navigation of world shipping; NOW THEREFORE: I, Mayor Ivan Court, ! L <: of Saint John do hereby proclaim September will be Seafarers Month in the City of Saint John. 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 4L11 j ,Nw.saintjohn.ca � C.P. 1971 Sain Mayor Ivan Court Mayor's Office Bureau du maire % r SAINT JOHN PROCLAMATION WHEREAS: September is known as Arthritis Awareness Month during which time The Arthritis Society promotes public awareness about this chronic disease that can affect children, adults and the elderly; and WHEREAS: the Society educates people about this disease through the Arthritis Information Line, The Arthritis Society's website, the Arthritis Public Forum series, the Arthritis Self- Management Program, and Chronic Pain Management Workshops; and WHEREAS. the Society strives to build positive relationships with elected officials in an effort to establish equitable access to care and treatment for arthritis; and WHEREAS. through education, support, understanding and awareness of arthritis, The Society helps nearly 4.5 million people and raises funds through door -to -door canvassing and initiatives such as Go Blue & Give Too and Bluebird sales; and WHEREAS. arthritis Awareness Month will focus on communities committing to a world without arthritis, providing help to those living with arthritis and supporting innovative research to ultimately find a cure for this debilitating disea e; NOW THEREFORE: I, Ma Yor Ivan Court - -____— S a rntJohn do hereby proclaim the month of September 2011 Arthritis Awareness Month. In witness whereof I have set my hand and affixed the official seal of the Mayor of the City of SaintJohn. P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, NB Canada E2L 4L1 I www.saintjohn.ca I C.P. 1971 134 9, I (41 City of Saint John INTERNAL INSERTION ORDER Ror City of Saint Jahn use only:+ Budget Number: 110 0801 442 2010 Department: Common Clerk's Office Account # 7120 __ _ __ Contact: Elizabeth Gormley Phone: (506 ) 658 -2862 Fax: 506) 674 -4214 Special Instructions (if any): P Reference: 192 -194 St. James Street West Newspaper Insertion Dates (Check as applicable) (SJTJ= Saint John Telegraph Journal) SJTJ City Information Ad SJTJ Independent Placement SJTJ Classifieds Date(s): Tuesday, August 2nd, 2011 Tuesday, August 23rd, 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 iP11 PROPOSED ZONING BY -LAW AMENDMENT RE: 192 -194 ST. JAMES STREET WEST 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, August 29, 2011 at 7:00 p.m., by: Rezoning a parcel of land with an area of approximately 240 square metres, located at 192 -194 St. James Street West, also identified as PH) No. 00367722, from "R -2" One and Two Family Residential to "R -4" Four Family Residential. REASON FOR CHANGE: To recognize an existing four- family dwelling as a permitted use. 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 maybe sent to the undersigned at City Hall. PROJET DE MODIFICATION DE L'ARRETE SUR LE ZONAGE OBJET: 192 -194, RUE ST. JAMES OUEST Par les pr6sentes, un avis public est donne par lequel le conseil communal de The City of Saint John indique son intention d'dtudier la modification suivante a Parretd sur le zonage de The City of Saint John, lots de ]a r6union ordinaire qui se tiendra dans la salle du conseil le lundi 29 aout 2011 a 19 It : Rezonage d'une parcelle de terrain d'une superficie d'environ 240 metres carr6s, situ6e au 192 -194, rue St. James ouest, et portant le NID 00367722, de zone r6sidentielle — habitations unifamiliales et bifamiliales «R -2» a zone r6sidentielle — habitations de quatre logements <<R -4». RAISON DE LA MODIFICATION: Reconnaitre l'utilisation permise d'un ddifice a quatre logements existant. Toute personae intdressde peut examiner le projet de modification au bureau de la greffi6re communale ou au bureau de Purbanisme et du d6veloppement A Ph6tel de ville au 15, Market Square, Saint John, N.- B., entre 8 h 30 et 16 h 30 du lundi au vendredi, sauf les fours f6ri6s. Veuillez faire parvenir vos objections au projet de modification par 6crit a Pattention de la soussign6e a Ph6tel de ville. If you require French services for a Common Council Si vous exigez des services frangais pour une rdunion meeting, please contact the office of the Common de Conseil Communal, s'il vous plait contacter le Clerk. bureau de la greffiere communale. Elizabeth Gormley, Common Clerk Elizabeth Gormley, Greffiere communale 658 -2862 658 -2862 MR T I- 0 --I Ul mar k, fZe- ad 30 4 41 19 50 15.24 m )t —Ovef (m 0-40 0, 83 46� 44 elm 50 Al LUDLOW -.20 STR EFT #00 %; ti i F-I FA 46� 44 elm 50 Al LUDLOW -.20 STR EFT #00 %; ti i F-I FA 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 240 square metres, located at 192 -194 St. James Street West, also identified as being PID No. 00367722, from "R -2" One and Two Family Residential to "R -4" Four Family Residential ARRETE No C.P. I10- ARRETE MODIFIANT L'ARRETE SUR LE ZONAGE DE THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN Lors dune reunion du conseil communal, The City of Saint John a decret6 ce qui suit : Varretd sur le zonage de The City of Saint John, decret6 le dix -neuf (19) d6cembre 2005, est modifid par: 1 La modification de 1'annexe «A >>, Plan de zonage de The City of Saint John, permettant de modifier la d6signation pour une parcelle de terrain d'une superficie d'environ 240 m6tres carrels, situ6e au 192- 194, rue St. James ouest, et portant le NID 00367722, de zone residentielle — habitations unifamiliales et bifamiliales <<R -2» a zone residentielle — habitations de quatre logements «R -4» - all as shown on the plan attached hereto - toutes les modifications sont indiquees sur and forming part of this by -law. le plan ci joint et font partie du prdsent arret6. 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 and signed by: Mayor/Maire EN FOI DE QUOI, The City of Saint John a fait apposer son sceau communal sur le prdsent arrete le 2011, avec les signatures suivantes : Common Clerk/Greffi&re communale First Reading - Premi&re lecture Second Reading - Deuxi6me lecture Third Reading - Troisidme lecture 138 Planning P.O. Box 1971 506 658 -2800 Advisory Committee Saint John New Brunswick Canada E2L 4L1 August 17, 2011 Your Worship and Councillors: SUBJECT: 192 -194 St. James Street West Rezoning Application On July 18, 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 August 16, 2011 meeting. City of Saint John Saied Salamat, the applicant, was in attendance at the meeting and was in general agreement with staff's recommendation; however he did not agree with the recommended Section 39 condition that a bond of $5,000 be submitted and held for a period not exceeding one year as a condition of the rezoning of the subject property. The applicant expressed reservation toward the bond as he felt it would undermine his ability to invest the appropriate amount of capital necessary to make the required renovations. A suggestion was brought forward by the Committee to use the term "security" in place of "bond" to enable the applicant to pursue the option of having financial institutions provide a secured agreement to honour the required $5,000. No other persons addressed the Committee and one letter was received in support of the application. After considering the report, the letter received and comments made by the applicant, the Committee recommended approval of the proposed rezoning, with the above mentioned change to the proposed Section 39 condition. RECOMMENDATION: 1. That Common Council rezone a parcel of land with an area of approximately 240 square metres located at 192 -194 St. James Street West, also identified as PID Number 00367722, from "R -2" One and Two Family Residential to "R -4" Four Family Residential. 2. That, pursuant to the provisions of Section 39 of the Community Planning Act, the rezoning of the property at 192 -194 St. James Street West be subject to the following condition: 139 -2- a. that a security of $5,000 be submitted by the applicant to staff and held for a period not exceeding one year as a condition of the rezoning of the subject property. Should the applicant renovate the property as proposed to meet all the Minimum Property Standard Bylaw conditions, the Building Bylaw requirements and to the satisfaction of the Building Inspector, and the debris be cleaned from the site, the bond will be returned to the applicant in full. Res ectfully submitted, L in Murray Chairman U Project No. 11 -191 140 DATE: AUGUST 12, 2011 TO: PLANNING ADVISORY COMMITTEE FROM: COMMUNITY PLANNING PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT FOR: MEETING OF AUGUST 16, 2011 PREPARED BY: REVIEWED BY: Jody h fer Jac ue e Hamilton, MCIP, RPP Planner Deity Commissioner SUBJECT: Name of Applicant: Saied Salamat Name of Owner: Saied Salamat Location: 192 -194 St. James Street West PID: 00367722 Municipal Plan: Low Density Residential Zoning: "R -2" One and Two Family Residential Proposal: To convert an abandoned two - family dwelling to a four - family dwelling. Type of Application: Rezoning 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 40 141 Saied Salamat Page 2 192 -194 St. James Street West August 12, 2011 JURISDICTION OF COMMITTEE: The Community Planning Act authorizes the Planning Advisory Committee to give its views to Common Council concerning proposed amendments to the Zoning By -law. The Committee recommendation will be considered by Common Council at a public hearing on Monday, August 22, 2011. STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO COMMITTEE: 1. That Common Council rezone a parcel of land with an area of approximately 240 square metres located at 192 -194 St. James Street West, also identified as PID Number 00367722, from "R -2" One and Two Family Residential to "R -4" Four Family Residential, 2. That, pursuant to the provisions of Section 39 of the Community Planning Act, the rezoning of the property at 192 -194 St. James Street West be subject to the following condition: a. that a bond of $5,000 be submitted by the applicant to staff and held for a period not exceeding one year as a condition of the rezoning of the subject property. Should the applicant renovate the property as proposed to meet all the Minimum Property Standard Bylaw conditions, the Building Bylaw requirements and to the satisfaction of the Building Inspector, and the debris be cleaned from the site, the bond will be returned to the applicant in full. INPUT FROM OTHER SOURCES: Municipal Operations and Engineering has stated that: • A City approved water meter is required; • All parking is to be provided for on site; and • It is assumed from the application that the general existing site conditions and entry/exit will remain unchanged. Should any site or driveway modifications be required, Municipal Operations and Engineering must be contacted for further review and approval. Buildings and Inspection Services has indicated that they are supportive of the rezoning application at this property so that the illegal units can be dealt with and required building code upgrades be conducted. Buildings and Inspection Services have had a lengthy relationship with this property and the property owner and hope that this rezoning will be the start of resolving a number of code related issues at the property. The property is currently the subject of an open Minimum Property Standards case; currently on hold because the building is presently vacant The property owner has been uncooperative at times — he has conducted work before obtaining the necessary permits, he has worked beyond the scope of approved permits, and it has been difficult to access the property to conduct inspections. 142 Saied Salamat Page 3 192 -194 St. James Street West August 12, 2011 The third and fourth units require extensive repairs before they can be occupied. Work that has been done without permits must be included in any permit application and work cannot proceed until permits are issued. ANALYSIS- Site and surrounding area The subject site is located on St. James Street West, just east of Queen Square West. The 240 square metre (2,583 square feet) four -unit dwelling is currently unoccupied and in need of significant repair. The corner -lot property has approximately 15 metres (49 feet) of frontage on St. James Street West and 15.7 metre (51.5 feet) frontage along Ludlow Street. The surrounding neighbourhood is an older residential area comprising a mixture of predominantly single- family and two - family dwellings. However, Service New Brunswick Assessment records show that a number of buildings within a two - block radius located on similar sized lots contain three or four dwelling units. Rezoning Our records show that the subject dwelling has been assessed as a two -unit, three -unit and four -unit building at various points in the past 30 years. Nevertheless, the zoning of the property has never altered from the existing "R -2" One and Two Family Residential zone. Although the applicant has not submitted floor plans with his application, he has communicated to staff that he is currently proposing to renovate the four -unit dwelling to include three one - bedroom units and one three- bedroom unit. To facilitate the development of the proposed four -unit building in this neighbourhood, the applicant is seeking a rezoning from "R -2" One and Two Family Residential to "R -4" Four Family Residential. There are three properties in a two -block radius from the subject site that have been rezoned to "R -4" Four Family Residential, including the property immediately across the street from the subject site at 372 Ludlow Street and the property at 202 St. James Street West, which is two lots south -west from the subject site. The proposed rezoning conforms with the existing Municipal Plan, which designates this neighbourhood as "Low Density Residential ". The designation allows for one, two and multi -unit dwellings to maximum of 38 units per hectare. P1anSJ The subject property is located in an area of the City that has been identified by the P1anSJ process as an "Intensification Area ". PlanSJ envisions Intensification Areas to entail higher residential density levels than the two -unit maximum as set out in the existing "R -2" zone. As such, the proposed rezoning positively reflects the direction that the planning process has taken with regards to this area of the Lower West Side neighbourhood; which is a position that has been strongly supported by the broader community. Discussion The existing building on the subject property has been vacant for some time and represents a potential hazard to the community in its current and/or future condition. As indicated in comments submitted by Building and Inspections Services, the current owner has attempted to do work on the building without 143 Saied Salamat Page 4 192 -194 St. James Street West August 12, 2011 the proper permits and has been generally uncooperative with staff in the process. Neighbours have expressed their concern for the long - standing substandard condition of the dwelling and the resulting blight that it has incurred on the community. The impact the condition of the building has on the surrounding neighbourhood is worsened by the amount of debris that is strewn throughout the property, which is apparently a result of the work that the owner has been doing without a permit. Property owners are required to dispose of any waste materials generated from renovation projects in a proper manner. Failing to do so places the property in violation of the "Dangerous and Unsightly" By -law, as is the case with the subject property. Typically staff do not look favourably on rezoning applications where a property violation exists. However, the proposed rezoning will enable further investment to occur in the property, thus improving its substandard condition and enhancing its compatibility with surrounding uses. In staff's view, however, there must be assurances that the violations will be addressed in a timely fashion. The Lower West Side community has had an above - average concentration of poverty for a number of years, which is only made worse by blighted properties that contribute to the decline of the neighbourhood. Considering the history of the property and the current substandard condition of the dwelling and the inconsiderate disposal of waste on the lot, staff is recommending that a bond of $5,000 be submitted by the applicant to staff and held for a period not exceeding one year as a condition of the rezoning of the subject property. Should the applicant renovate the property as proposed to meet all minimum standard bylaw conditions, and the debris be cleaned from the site immediately, the bond will be returned to the applicant in full. CONCLUSION: The Lower West Side is a priority neighbourhood that is in dire need of investment and repair. The applicant is proposing to renovate a four - family dwelling in an area of the neighbourhood that has not seen many new housing starts in recent years. Although this development will require a rezoning from "R -2" One and Two Family Residential to "R -4" Four Family Residential, staff can support the rezoning of the property based on the policies in the current plan, and also in consideration of the benefits this development could bring to the community. However, considering the history of the property and the challenges Building and Inspection Services have had in dealing with the applicant, staff is recommending that approval of the rezoning be subject to the condition that the applicant submit a bond of $5,000 for a period not exceeding one year. JK Project No. I 1 -191 144 PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENVURBANISME ET DEVELOPPEMENT 110 12 t+ 111 • 11 +' �• e�` / i` ` * Of ♦ +V + 3 //'''sw 29 ♦ 127 �' { A ee O I♦ +3`�C 1 ryanf ♦' ♦ /�v V'♦ _ 71e � e 2b ♦ 39 V �� 2 A ♦ 1 ♦ 113 (♦�'\ 721 i /i / ` 129 267 � • ,31 CO ,22 171 133 ♦ 139 ` 133 132 ♦ _Qj�V 190 136 110 ♦�A 1I6 µ 1 a 13 139 *1 4 136 H 161 r B3 i 334 i 0 ' • 4 ♦� 32e 1 164 e3 ` 190 - t0 177 87 ♦ 106 ♦ 1e6 ly v ♦ lee \ 190 is f ,ee �` ♦ ,9 • g� b i ,61 � /196 203 lei ' 203 7 \ 213 +ee 3B0 200 ` \ \\ 201 9e ♦ \` 209 100 �¢8 391 219 / ♦ 22 216 '\ 371 l Q! z1i e3 ♦ ♦ 22e 93 t 41P `\ � ♦ 379 271 220 N / ♦ 392 Sat 87 � 1 � ♦ ♦ US 0 4 / t ♦ 4 1 a, /258 ses • ♦ \� ® Subject Site /site en question: PID(s) /NIP(s): 00367722 Location: 192 -194 St. James Street West Date: July 25, 2011 Scale /echelle: Not to scale /Pas a 1'echelle 145 192 -194 St. James Street West HEX 92 -194 St. James Street West Neighbourhood 147 .• F� AN r� 3 N rF m m rF ,qi-. 0� �' 2"(a) City of Saint John INTERNAL INSERTION ORDER Newspaper Insertion Dates (Check as applicable) (SJTJ= Saint John Telegraph Journal) '"SJTJ City Information Ad SJTJ Independent Placement SJTJ Classifieds Date(s): Tuesday, August 2n6, 2011 Tuesday, August 23rd, 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): For Cih of Saint John use only: Butt Number _ 110 0801 442 2010 Contact: Department: Common Clerk's Office (Account # 71206)___ Contact: Elizabeth Gormley _ _ _ Phone: (506 658 -2862 Fax: 5Q6) 674 -4214 Special Instructions (if any): Reference: Lands Adjacent to 1035 Burchill Road Newspaper Insertion Dates (Check as applicable) (SJTJ= Saint John Telegraph Journal) '"SJTJ City Information Ad SJTJ Independent Placement SJTJ Classifieds Date(s): Tuesday, August 2n6, 2011 Tuesday, August 23rd, 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 `L1'] PROPOSED ZONING BY -LAW AMENDMENT RE: LANDS ADJACENT TO 1035 BURCHILL ROAD 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, August 29, 2011 at 7:00 p.m., by: Rezoning a parcel of land having an area of approximately 28.5 hectares, located adjacent to 1035 Burchill Road, also identified as being a portion of PID No. 00412189, from "I -2" Heavy Industrial to "PQ" Pits and Quarries, as illustrated below. (INSERT MAP) REASON FOR CHANGE: To permit the expansion of the existing quarry site 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. PROJET DE MODIFICATION DE L'ARRETE SUR LE ZONAGE OBJET: PROPRIETE ADJACENTE A CELLE SITUEE AU 1035, CHEMIN BURCHILL Par les presentes, un avis public est donne par lequel le conseil communal de The City of Saint John indique son intention d'etudier la modification suivante a 1'arrete sur le zonage de The City of Saint John, lors de la reunion ordinaire qui se tiendra dans la salle du conseil le lundi 29 aout 2011 a 19 It : Rezonage d'une parcelle de terrain d'une superficie d'einiron 28,5 hectares, dtant adjacente a celle situee au 1035, chemin Burchill, et formant une partie du NID 00412189, de zone d'industrie lourde << I -2 » a zone de earri6res << PQ », comme le montre la carte ci- dessous. (INSERER LA CARTE) RAISON DE LA MODIFICATION: Permettre ]'expansion du site de la carriere existante. Toute personne interestee peut examiner le projet de modification au bureau de la greffiere communale ou au bureau de 1'urbanisme et du developpement a l'h6tel de ville situe 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. Written objections to the amendment may be sent Veuillez faire part de vos objections au projet de to the undersigned at City Hall. modification par dcrit a ]'attention du soussigne a I'h6tel de ville. If you require French services for a Common Council meeting, please contact the office of the Common Clerk. Elizabeth Gormley, Common Clerk 658 -2862 Si vous exigez des services frangais pour une reunion de Conseil Communal, s'il vous plait contacter le bureau de la greffi6re communale. Elizabeth Gormley, Greffiere communale 658 -2862 U671] ' � �. ~| / ----� . � 1 . / , � / ' Z / �/ .. \ ' --. / 0- , 10%4 C910 � / Wilk � / /~ ' H-- | (aussi disponible en frangais) Type of Application -'Municipal Plan Amendment [ El Subdivision Similar / Compatible Use [oning By -law Amendment ❑ Variance ❑ Temporary Use ❑ Amendment to Section 39 Conditions ❑ Conditional Use ❑ Change / Re- establishment of ❑ Zoning Confirmation Letter ❑ Letter for Liquor Licensing Non - Conforming Use Contact Information Name of Applicant tj Ln d u s4r r Mailing Address of Applicant (with Postal Code) _ �. s c '!? ( 1 rd -"IX IJ . (Z Lf Home Telephone Number SZ61 `D 2--CG Work Telephone Number _SC9 " 60 Ly 1 a Fax Number _ - G 6 G S~ Y 29:3 E -mail _ ti ! r t/ I _0101 t K.AoJ CA I- -Name of Property Owner (if different from applicant) C.ISI A/e S S jl%G'Lu i ,,1 Mailing Address (with Postal Code) Property Information % Location' Civic # Street PID PZ q1Z / 97 . e Existing Use of Property _��(/ %� C Proposed Use of Property v to /d^ Existing Plan Designation of Property Existing Zoning of Property Description of Application Proposed Plan Designation of Property -. Proposed Zoning' of Property---- `Z. Describe what you propose to do (attach additional pages if necessary), SuSdrvlde a 70 arg`c Ord ��ns � �rP � Ci cw"['7 NOTE: If the applicant is NOT the o Owner's signature or authorization (in writing) to submit this application is required. Signature of Applicant Signature of Owner ��► Date 'de, Date / For Office Use Only a ere-- r & DE YJ� Reviewed by Date Development Officer Information Accompanying Application: i f k w aroa.ra..�+p. Letter of Intent ❑ Site Plan ❑ Fee ❑ Tentative Subdivision Plan Building Elevations Other ❑ Floor ❑ Sign l P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, NB Canada ER 41.7 www.saintjohn.ca C.P. 1971 Saint John. N.-B. Canada E2L 4L1 152 JUL U 4 2011 x.1ii:Tt` JOHN �:' &8 APPROVALS a PURPOSE OF PLAN -TO CREATE PARCEL A TO HE ADDED TO AND FORM PART OF LOT 05 -01, PLAN 2613216& PID 55193908 DOCUMENT, EXPROPRIATION BY ORDER IN COUNCIL 71 -393 DDa DATED JUNE 11, 1971, REGISTEFt =D JUNE 16. 1971, IN VOLUME 648, PAGE 634, AS NUMBER 229639, PID 00412189. OWNER'S SIGNATURE: GARY JOCHELMAN FOR: BUSINESS NEW BRUNSWICK NOTES - DIRECTIONS ARE N.B. GRID AZIMUTHS DERIVED FROM THE N.B. GRID MONUMENTS TABULATED HEREON. -THE SCALE FACTOR USED WAS 1.0000. -THE DOCUMENT NUMBERS REFERRED TO ON THIS PLAN ARE THOSE OF THE COUNTY REGISTRY OFFICE. - ADJACENT OWNER INFORMATION OBTAINED FROM SING RECORDS -AS USED HEREIN, THE WORD CERTIFY SHALL MEAN AN DWESSION OFTHE CONSULTANT'S PROFESSIONAL OPINION TO THE BEST OF ITS INFORMATION, KNOWLEDGE AM BELIEF, AND DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A WARRANTY OR GUARANTEE BY THE CONSULTANT. -ALL DISTANCES SHOWN ARE CALCULATED GRID INSTANCES. - CERTIFICATION IS NOT MADE AS TO LEGAL TITLE, BEING THE DOMAIN OF A LAWYER, NOR TO THE ZONING do SETBACK BY -LAWS OR REGULATIONS, BEING THE DOMAIN OF A DEVELOPMENT OFFICER. - CERTIFICATION IS NOT MADE AS TO COVENANTS SET OUT IN THE DOCUMENT(S) AND THE LOCATION OF ANY UNDERGROUND SERVICES AND /OR FIXTURES, PERMANENT OR OTHERWISE. - INITIAL FIELD SURVEY WAS COMPLETED Month DO, YYYY. 153 �In 15 SURVEY AREA sulo.+i eln�v Wnan cure yarmn aTni 4wx fil Doaewr / wwue / rwc Doe/Yd,fro. wwee utcx er�N smxc¢ NcN ewNewa sa eu.a aw o I uerulcv.au>w cAUn M N Deo. tewm 1 amtn,l a _I I eertul a —1 r PLAN: 711TH OF ROUTE 1 AND WEST TO KING WILLIAM ROAD, TY OF SAINT JOHN, SAINT JOHN COUNTY. N.B. „ taD o taD mD Dao 100 SCALE IZ= 010 M4H RIi1EET� HLYARO %/JE aVRr:dw, rPY entmevtcN 91 GENIVAR: xMw.al�oow SURVEYOR " °: STATEMENT I HEREBY CERTFY THAT US PLAN IS CORRECT. TE��TA �. B. r N.B.LS. No. SURVEYED BY: ANDREW K. TOOLE, N.B.LS. DATED: JULY 4. 2011 #379 7� CRAW* ANT IFKM 1001 .LIB No.a.0YD65-A ...IA -62D 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 28.5 hectares, located adjacent to 1035 Burchill Road, also identified as being a portion of PID No. 00412189, from "I -2" Heavy Industrial to "PQ" Pits and Quarries - all as shown on the plan attached hereto and forming part of this by -law. IN WITNESS WHEREOF The City of Saint John has caused the Corporate Common Seal of the said City to be affixed to this by -law the * day of *, A.D. 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 : Uarretd sur le zonage de The City of Saint John, decrete le dix -neuf (19) decembre 2005, est modifie par: 1 La modification de 1'annexe «A », Plan de zonage de The City of Saint John, permettant de modifier la designation pour une parcelle de terrain d'une superficie d'environ 28,5 hectares, etant adjacente a celle situee au 1035, chemin Burchill, et formant une partie du NID 00412189, de zone d'industrie iourde << I -2» a zone de canridres << 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 sceau communal sur le present arrete le 2011, avec ies signatures suivantes : Common Clerk/Greffidre communale First Reading - Premiere lecture Second Reading - Deuxieme lecture Third Reading - Troisieme lecture 154 72 �� Planning P.O. Box 1971 506 658 -2800 Advisory Committee Saint John New Brunswick Canada E2L 4L1 August 17, 2011 Your Worship and Councillors: SUBJECT: Proposed Rezoning - Lands Adjacent to 1035 Burchill Road On July 18, 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 August 16, 2011 meeting. city of Saint John Mr. Brian Irving of Saint John Industrial Parks Limited, representing the applicant, attended the meeting and advised that he was in agreement with the Staff Recommendation, Mr. Irving responded to questions from the committee regarding the impacts of blasting on the water main and past clear cutting of the quarry area. Mr. Irving noted the quarry operator employs licensed blasters and the site is quite remote with respect to development in the Lorneville area. No letters were received regarding the application and no other persons appeared before the Committee with respect to the application. Following consideration of the report, letters and presentations, the Committee adopted the staff recommendation. RECOMMENDATION: 1. That Common Council rezone a parcel of land having an area of approximately 28.5 hectares, located adjacent to 1035 Burchill Road, also identified as being a portion of PID No. 00412189, from "I -2" Heavy Industrial to "PQ" Pits and Quarries. 2. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 39 of the Community Planning Act, the use and development of the parcel of land having an area of approximately 28.5 hectares, located adjacent to 1035 Burchill Road, also identified as being a portion of PID No. 00412189, be subject to the following conditions: a) In addition to the requirements contained in Section 680(10)(d) of the Zoning By -Law, the elevation of any disturbed portion of the site after excavation / extraction shall be no less than 50 metres above sea level; 155 -2- b) That any stockpiling of material within the water main easement and excavation within or around the easement that may compromise the integrity of the water main be prohibited; c) That the applicant's engineering consultant must verify that the blasting activity will not affect the integrity of the existing water transmission main; d) The required security in accordance with Section 680(5)(b) of the Zoning By -Law be set at $ 20,000; e) The buffer along the southern portion of the existing excavation site (PID 55193908) be reinstated within 2 years using coniferous trees in accordance with a plan subject to the approval of the Development Officer, f) That the plans required to accompany the excavation permit application in accordance with Section 690 (4)(i) of the Zoning By- Law, be subject to the approval of the Development Officer prior to the issuance of the Excavation Permit, and that these plans show the extent of the site to be cleared in conjunction with the phased development of the site and the location of processing equipment and stockpiles. Respectfully submitted, CAinM ay Chairman T� Project No. U-195 156 t 3� r The City of Saint John DATE: AUGUST 12, 2011 TO: PLANNING ADVISORY COMMITTEE FROM: COMMUNITY PLANNING PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT FOR: MEETING OF AUGUST 16, 2011 PREPARED BY: REVIEWED BY: e�CIt Mark Reade, P. Eng., MCIP, RPP Senior Planner SUBJECT: Name of Applicant: Name of Owner: Location: we - A �111 ' , , 7- 24 ;; ��� Ken Forrest, MCIP, RPP Commissioner Saint John Industrial Parks Limited Business New Brunswick Adjacent to 1035 Burchill Road Portion of 00412189 Municipal Plan: Heavy Industrial and Open Space Zoning: Existing: "I -2" Heavy Industrial Proposed: "PQ" Pits and Quarries Proposal: To permit the expansion of the existing quarry site. Type of Application: Rezoning ,rte SAINT JOHN P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, NB Canada E2L 41-11 www saintjohn.ca I C.P. 1971 Saint John, N. -B. Canada E2L 40 157 Saint John Industrial Parks Limited Page 2 Adjacent to 1035 Burchill Road August 12, 2011 JURISDICTION OF COMMITTEE: The Community Planning Act authorizes the Planning Advisory Committee to give its views to Common Council concerning proposed rezoning applications. The Committee's recommendation will be considered by Common Council at a Public Hearing on Monday, August 29, 2011. STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO COMMITTEE: 1. That Common Council rezone a parcel of land having an area of approximately 28.5 hectares, located adjacent to 1035 Burchill Road, also identified as being a portion of PID No. 00412189, from "I -2" Heavy Industrial to "PQ" Pits and Quarries. 2. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 39 of the Community Planning Act, the use and development of the parcel of land having an area of approximately 28.5 hectares, located adjacent to 1035 Burchill Road, also identified as being a portion of PID No. 00412189, be subject to the following conditions: a) In addition to the requirements contained in Section 680(10)(d) of the Zoning By -Law, the elevation of any disturbed portion of the site after excavation / extraction shall be no less than 50 metres above sea level; b) That any stockpiling of material within the water main easement and excavation within or around the easement that may compromise the integrity of the water main be prohibited; c) That the applicant's engineering consultant must verify that the blasting activity will not affect the integrity of the existing water transmission main; d) The required security in accordance with Section 680(5)(b) of the Zoning By -Law be set at $ 20,000; e) The buffer along the southern portion of the existing excavation site (PID 55193908) be reinstated within 2 years using coniferous trees in accordance-with a plan subject to the approval of the Development Officer, f) That the plans required to accompany the excavation permit application in accordance with Section 690 (4)(i) of the Zoning By -Law, be subject to the approval of the Development Officer prior to the issuance of the Excavation Permit, and that these plans show the extent of the site to be cleared in conjunction with the phased development of the site and the location of processing equipment and stockpiles. 158 Saint John Industrial Parks Limited Page 3 Adjacent to 1035 Burchill Road August 12, 2011 BACKGROUND: On January 14, 2003 the Planning Advisory Committee approved the establishment of a temporary excavation to supply aggregate to the Coleson Cove project and prepare the subject site for future industrial uses, subject to the following terms and conditions: a) The proposed excavation shall be completed no later than eight months after approval of the required excavation permit. b) The excavated material shall be used only for the Coleson Cove generating station refurbishment project. C) The proponent shall be responsible for all necessary upgrading of Burchill Road in order to accommodate the traffic generated by the excavation project, and shall return the road to same or better condition than presently exists upon completion of the project. d) The proposed excavation shall be limited to the subject site, containing approximately 22 acres, as generally shown on the [submitted] location map. e) The application for an excavation permit shall include plans illustrating how the site will be made suitable for a future development. On August 10, 2004, the Committee amended its conditions by permitting the use of the remaining stock -piled material left on the site for projects in the Spruce Lake Industrial Park. At their meeting of April 8, 2008 the Planning Advisory Committee recommended that the parcel of land at 1035 Burchill Road, also identified as being a portion of PID No. 00412189, be rezoned from "I -2" Heavy Industrial to "PQ" Pits and Quarries and that the rezoning was subject to the condition that, in addition to the requirements contained in Section 680(10)(d) of the Zoning By -law, the elevation of any disturbed portion of the site after excavation shall be no less than 50 metres above sea level. The Committee also granted a variance from the requirements of the Subdivision By -law to permit the creation of the proposed Lot 05 -01 with no municipal water and sewer services, on condition that the use of the lot is restricted to a quarry and a note to this effect is placed on the final subdivision plan and approved the creation of Lot 05 -01 having access from King William Road via the Burchill Road private right -of -way. On April 28, 2008 Common Council gave third reading to the rezoning and adopted Section 39 conditions. INPUT FROM OTHER SOURCES: Municipal Operations and Engineering has the following comments regarding the proposed rezoning and subdivision of the lands adjacent to 1035 Burchill Road: • There are no municipal services available for this site. 159 Saint John Industrial Parks Limited Page 4 Adjacent to 1035 Burchill Road August 12, 2011 • Burchill Road is a private road and as such, is not maintained by the City. • This subdivision does not abut a public street as per the requirements of the Subdivision By -law. • There is an existing municipal water transmission main and easement along the western edge of the proposed Parcel "A" — absolutely nothing can be built overtop of this easement. Additionally, due to the nature of the proposed development, there is to be no excavation or stockpiling of material within this easement and on the underlying water transmission main. • Prior to any blasting taking place, the applicant's engineering consultant must verify that the blasting activity will not affect the integrity of the existing water transmission main. • Detailed storm drainage and grading plans and a storm water design report must be submitted by the applicant's engineering consultant to this Department for review and approval. • The applicant is responsible for obtaining all necessary municipal permits. • There is an existing watercourse on proposed Parcel "A" (Frenchman Creek). The proximity of this development to the watercourse would be subject to review /comments of New Brunswick Department of Environment. Buildings and Inspection Services notes the site at 1035 Burchill Road is currently being used as a rock quarry and the department has been unsuccessful in obtaining sufficient information and security from the owner (Debly Resources Inc.) to allow us to issue an excavation permit in 2010 or in 2011. As well the provisions of section 680 of the Zoning By -Law are not being followed in that the existing quarry site has been clear cut, (section 680(10)(i)), and the property line setbacks have been ignored (section 680(3)(v)). Saint John Fire Department has been informed of the application. Saint John Transit has been informed of the application. Saint John Industrial Parks Ltd. has no objections and supports the application. Saint John Energy has been informed of the application. Maritimes & Northeast Pipeline and Brunswick Pipeline have been informed of the proposal. Maritimes & Northeast Pipeline and Brunswick Pipeline advise the area is clear of their facilities. ANALYSIS: Subject Site The subject site is a 28.5 hectare parcel of land that is proposed to be added to the existing 12.1 hectare quarry site at 1035 Burchill Road, approximately 2.5 kilometres north of King William Road and approximately 1.3 kilometres south of Route 1, on the Lomeville peninsula. The site is currently treed and has a width of between 150 metres and 530 metres and a depth of between 390 and 820 metres. Elevations of the site range from 57 metres in the eastern portion of the subject site to 32 metres along the proposed western boundary of the subject site. 160 Saint John Industrial Parks Limited Page 5 Adjacent to 1035 Burchill Road August 12, 2011 Proposed Development Saint John Industrial Parks Ltd. (SJIPL) has submitted this application to rezone the subject property from "I -2" Heavy Industrial to "PQ" Pits and Quarries, in order to permit an expansion to the existing quarry at 1035 Burchill Road. Additional expansion area is required for activities such as stockpiling and the processing and crushing of material and the intent is to quarry available material from the expansion area. If approved, the site will be conveyed to Debly Enterprises Ltd. Surrounding Area The area surrounding the subject site on the north, south and east sides for a distance of a minimum of between 670 and 1950 metres is undeveloped woodland that is part of the Province of New Brunswick's large industrial land bank in the area. This land was expropriated by the Province in the early 1970s for future industrial development and is designated Heavy Industrial in the current Municipal Plan and zoned "I -2" Heavy Industrial. The western boundary of the proposed expansion will abut lands held by the Nature Conservancy of Canada. The expanded area, at its closest point will be approximately 2890 metres from the closest residentially zoned property located at 2550 Lorneville Road. Municipal Plan Direction The majority of the subject site is designated Heavy Industrial by the Municipal Development Plan with a small portion of the western area of the site designated as Open Space. Staff note the boundary shown on Schedule 2A — Future Land Use Pan of the Municipal Plan is approximate and represents the general concept and principles of the Plan and that the portion of the site which is designated as open space is currently zoned "I -2" Heavy Industrial. Specific policies respecting pits and quarries are contained in Section 2.4.3 of the Municipal Plan. These policies were developed and incorporated into the Plan in 2001 as a result of the Pits and Quarries Aggregate Resource Strategy, which was prepared by the City in 1994, with considerable citizen and industry input, in response to Common Council's request for a review of the development process. The 1994 report's most important recommendation was that excavation be removed as a permitted use in the "RF" Rural, "I -1" Light Industrial and "I -2" Heavy Industrial zones and that a specific zone, with more rigorous standards than existed at the time, should be created for this activity. The study also included maps and descriptive information that identified areas of the City with significant aggregate resources that, where feasible, should be protected and utilized. Section 2.4.3 of the Municipal Plan states that extractive industries form an important component of the economic activity in the region and it is the intent of the City to support and encourage their continued operation as a contribution to the economic health of the community. It is also recognized, however, that pit and quarry operations can constitute a disturbance and hazard to nearby urban uses. Pits and quarries are not regarded as permanent land uses and therefore they are not designated on Schedule 2 -A of the Plan. The Plan permits pits and quarries in all land use designations and intends that such activities will be controlled through specific rezonings to the "PQ" Pits and Quarries zone, and then later rezoned to a zone compatible with the underlying land use designation (in this case Heavy Industrial). This approach 161 Saint John Industrial Parks Limited Page 6 Adjacent to 1035 BurchiIl Road August 12, 2011 allows for a review of proposed new operations and a decision by Common Council as to whether or not they may be established. In addition to determining whether or not the proposed location of a pit or quarry is appropriate, the Plan indicates that it is the City's intent to regulate the day -to -day operation of such uses with respect to such matters as: • hours of operation, • site development measures to assist in the control of smoke, dust, odours, toxic materials, vibration and noise, • setbacks, yards and separation from existing roads or uses, • visual screening, • location of buildings and equipment, • safety and protective measures, • location of entrances and exits, and the designation of hauling routes, • signs and landscaping, and • progressive rehabilitation. These matters have been incorporated into the standards of the "PQ" Pits and Quarries zone which permits extraction and related activities, such as screening, crushing, washing and stockpiling of aggregates. Staff acknowledge the development proposed is consistent with the provisions of the existing Municipal Plan. Growth Strategy The subject property is located outside of the Primary Development Area boundary established in the Growth Strategy with the site designated as a Rural Area. The Growth Strategy notes that appropriate resource based land uses may be permitted. Staff are of the opinion the proposed development is in conformity with the Growth Strategy, In addition, the site is mostly designated as Rural Resource on Schedule 2A of the Draft Municipal Plan (Future Land Use Plan) with the portion of the site that is adjacent to Frenchman Brook designated as Open Space. Zoning By -law The western side of the Lorneville peninsula is one of the areas that are specifically shown on the maps accompanying the Pits and Quarries Aggregate Resource Strategy as having significant secondary bedrock aggregate (crushed rock) potential. The remote location of the expansion area, which is at least 2.8 kilometres from the nearest residential area at the end of Lorneviile Road, combined with its adjacency to an existing quarry operation suggests that the subject site is an ideal location for the proposed expansion. 162 Saint John Industrial Parks Limited Page 7 Adjacent to 1035 Burchill Road August 12, 2011 The expanded area is able to satisfy the relevant Zoning By -Law requirements. In addition, the site also appears to meet or exceed the provincial Department of Environment's setback guidelines' for final operational perimeters of quarries from public rights of way, residential development, public water supplies, wells, buildings and residential properties. While the expanded area is able to satisfy the relevant requirements of the Zoning By -law, Staff note activities on the area occupied by the existing quarrying operation have not been in conformance with the existing "PQ" Pits and Quarries zone standards, specifically clear cutting and the failure to leave the required 30 metre buffer around the perimeter of the site. Based on this, Staff recommend that the required security in accordance with Section 680(5)(b) be set at $ 20,000 and that the buffer along the southern portion of the existing excavation site (PID 55193908) be reinstated within 2 years using coniferous trees in accordance with a plan subject to the approval of the Development Officer. Staff also recommend that the plans required to accompany the excavation permit application in accordance with Section 690 (4)(i), be subject to the approval of the Development Officer prior to the issuance of the Excavation Permit, and that these plans show the extent of the site to be cleared in conjunction with the phased development of the site and the location of processing equipment and stockpiles. The approval of the previous rezoning was subject to the condition that the elevation of any disturbed portion of the site after excavation shall be no less than 50 metres above sea level. This was put in place to set a specific elevation for the final elevation of the area where the aggregate material was being quarried following the extraction operation. This condition can remain as excavation activities will still be occurring on the portion of the site that has an elevation above 50 metres geodetic. Municipal Operations and Engineering have expressed concern regarding the impacts of the operation, including blasting, may have on an existing water main to Coleson Cove that is located along the proposed western boundary of the site. Staff recommend Section 39 conditions that prohibit the stockpiling of material within the water main easement and excavation within or around the easement that may compromise the integrity of the water main. Staff also recommend a Section 39 condition that the applicant's engineering consultant must verify that the blasting activity will not affect the integrity of the existing water transmission main. While the site is fairly remote, combined with the industrial nature of the area and the location of the access route such that truck traffic will not be required to pass through any residential area in order to get to or from Route No. 1, Staff are of the opinion that the proposed rezoning and expansion to the site is reasonable only with the recommended Section 39 conditions. CONCLUSION: The subject site is adjacent to an existing quarry that is located in a remote area of the Spruce Lake Industrial Park on the Lorneville peninsula. The site is separated from the nearest existing dwelling by approximately 2.9 kilometres. In addition to the isolated nature of the site, access for hauling of 1 New Brunswick Department of Environment and Local Government. Environmental Management Division — Approvals Branch. Draft Rock Quarry and Asphalt Plant Siting Guideline. 2005. 163 Saint John Industrial Parks Limited Page 8 Adjacent to 1035 Burchill Road August 12, 2011 materials does not pass through any residential area. Approval of the proposed rezoning, conditions pertaining to blasting and activities on the water main easement is recommended. MR Project No. 11 -195 164 165 APPROVALS -)*I- PURPOSE OF PLAN -TO CREATE PARCEL A TO BE ADDED TO AND FORA/ PART OF LOT OS-01, PLAN 26132168, PID 55193006 DOCUMp1T: EXPROPRIATION BY ORDER IN COUNCIL 71 -393 D. DATED JUNE 11, 1971, REGISTERED JUNE 16, 1971, UM VOLUME 648, PAGE 634, AS NUMBER 229639, PID 00412189. OW4ER'S SIGNATURE- GARY JOCHEL.MAN FOR: BUSINESS NEW 13RUNSXICK 1r' NOTES - DWECTIONS ARE H.B. GRID AZIMUTHS DERIVED FROM THE N.B. GRID MONUMENTS TABULATED HEREM -THE SCALE FACTOR USED WAS 1.0000. -THE DOCUMENT NUMBERS REFERRED tO ON THIS PLAN ARE THOSE OF THE COUNTY REGISTRY OFFICE - ADJACENT OWNER INFORMATION OBTAINED FROM SNB RECORDS -AS USED HEREIN, THE WORD CERTIFY SHALL MEAN AN EXPRESSION OFTHE CONSULTANT'S PROFESSIONAL OPINION TO THE BEST OF IT'S INFORMATION, KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF, AND DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A WARRANTY OR GUARANTEE BY THE CONSULTANT. -ALL DISTANCES SHOWN ARE CALCULATED GRID DISTANCES - CERTIFICATION IS NOT MADE AS TO LEGAL TITLE, BEING THE DOMAIN OF A LAWYER, NOR M THE ZONING & SETBACK BY -LAWS OR REGULATIONS, BF]NG THE DOMAIN OF A DEVELOPMENT OFFICER- -CERTIFICATION IS NOT MADE AS TO COVENANTS SET OUT IN THE DOCUMENT(s) AND THE LOCATION OF ANY UNOERCROUNO SERVICES MID /OR FIXTURES, PERMANENT OR OTHERWISE. - INITIAL FIELD SURVEY WAS COMPLETED Mmth DD, YYYY. LLoolo P SURVEY AREA LOCALITY SKETCH LEGEND DESCWTION TION s,,..c+ ssror amloarc YvwW1r D re aravo,4m Pwm rMm nACWi O (7 Sru.pyY sl.lcr IIYIa;II rgMY1 ® R[u5rt4D o,y eYCaarm mwoWa¢owvr p � TKYAI(y cmmWalE v6D01fi � vmsmargl YUNOt A)1 vo4® eW4op r+.mT rasT ® mwY[ Yrnes ,r W WFII ugltY bzr ❑ wuu[n]rs SpYavC POM ANe fY1110 * YYOYN YY 14PI YMC rOXVI O R RO4ro �I YR RyYp � OY1EiP W7MWl: / r61gr Yp NRYSYO( 41C 9PY':IUP YY1iA YIYE / RRC M19R� T GLwIIA UrM Y.YaI WWp} rFL Ulpl W.SCI ® WOCw61I / YOYIIE / M,(C ON:AI+.NS. ura easy p SWq WW WSLM4 /a0M441 GY3LD YM IT' G¢ (ti,y) Y1MIgE � W11RaRPI¢raTO#9 OYCIYJW Tf NAE / (LT' [Mm p(/InY51 CaIMAt ) —� fFa� IIWr IrYONY GYl•IFtl 11kS _ _ _ __ YYVOVaL SGNCY Ea5e51W1r ILSG Cd1YplIL WUf LMl1Y GIDOIT I•Jr; ,Wy IY6 _ - 1� OF vOW r� 6 4vE w10f LE1LT YN BY r,a rl/.1 IOmMC SUBDIVISION PLAN: IN N BRUNSWICK SUBDIVISION SOUTH OF ROUTE 1 AND NEST TO KING WILLIAM ROAD, CITY OF SAINT JOHN, SAINT JOHN COUNTY. N.B. In1en No 4. SCALE I:S09 �. 510 WW1>RY4T, r1AYARONAfi SIA(TJaN,NyI VRWygW1p0 GENIVAR I. Wv: ,WEWAkCW $lRVEYOR'S STATEMQIT I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN IS CORRECT. TENTATIVE N.B.L. S �� B. � S N0. HMO MW_ 9 �5 SURVEYED BY, ANDREW K TOOL£, N.B.L.S. DATED: JULY 4. 2011 /379 U Wi ART RBII: XICf Jab Mo S*N5&-A u :SJ09055 -A -620 V{ BY -LAW NUMBER BA -1 A LAW RELATING TO FIRE - DAMAGED BUILDINGS IN THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN Be it enacted by the Common Council of The City of Saint John as follows: 1. A By -Law of The City of Saint John entitled "A Law Relating to Fire- Damaged Buildings in the City of Saint John ", By -law Number BA -1, enacted on the 215` November, 2005, is hereby repealed. 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 August, A.D. 2011 and signed by: Mayor /Maire ARRETE No BA -1 ARRETE CONCERNANT LES BATIMENTS ENDOMMAGES PAR LE FEU DANS THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN Lors dune reunion du conseil communal, The City of Saint John a decrete ce qui suit: 1. L'arrete de The City of Saint John intitule « Arrete concernant les batiments endommages par le feu dans The City of Saint John », Arrete N° BA -1, decrete le 21 novembre 2005, est abroge. EN FOI DE QUOI, The City of Saint John a fait apposer son sceau communal sur le present arrete le _ aout 2011, avec les signatures suivantes: Common Clerk/Greffiere communale First Reading - August 15, 2011 Second Reading - August 15, 2011 Third Reading - Premiere lecture - le 15 aout 2011 Deuxieme lecture — le 15 aout 2011 Troisieme lecture- 167 10, Z The City of Saint John August 29, 2011 His Worship Mayor Court And Councillors Your Worship and Councillors SUBJECT: Proposed Municipal Plan Amendment — 109 to 113 Prince Edward Street and 27 Richmond Street A Public Presentation was made on July 181h, 2011 of a proposed amendment to the Municipal Development Plan which would redesignate on Schedule 2 -A and 2 -C of the Plan, from Medium Density Residential to Approved Commercial Development, a parcel of land with an area of approximately 470 square metres, located at 109 — 113 Prince Edward Street and 27 Richmond Street, also identified as PID Number 00012468. The required advertising has been completed, and attached you will find a copy of the public notice, and any letters of opposition or support received. 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, September 26th in the Council Chamber at 7:00 pm, or not to proceed with the proposed amendment process and adopt a resolution to deny the application, Respectfully submitted, Elizabeth Gormley Common Clerk Attachment SAINT JOHN P.O. Bux 1971 SainL John, NB Canada E2L4L1 vA"v.saingohn.ca C.P'971 Saint John, N.-B, Canada E2L4L1 168 1 The (Ity ofitin[lahn August 26th, 2011 Deputy Mayor Chase and Members of Common Council, Subject: Sidewalk Art on Uptown Streets The recent uncertainty surrounding chalk art and busking on City streets /sidewalks requires clarification from City Staff. Motion: That this matter be referred to the City Manager and City Solicitor for a report and recommendation. Sincerely, Ivan Court Mayor 4� SAINT JOHN P.O. Box 1 371 Saint john, Na CanaM UL M I www.salntjahnxa I C.P.1971 Saint John, N �, Canaria E2L 4L I 169 2YA :Y. August 29, 2011 Mayor Ivan Court and Members Of Common Council Dear Mayor Court and Members of Common Council, Motion: That the planning department, through the City Manager, prepare a report on the available development lots currently approved by the City and that have yet to be developed. Rational: Plan SJ is based on modest growth in the city, unlike our previous Municipal Plan that forecasted a need for growth all over this vast city. I believe it would be valuable information for this and future councils to know how many approved building lots are available for development in the city. Basic Economics would show that by continually increasing the supply, prices will fall and developers' assertions that more lots means more tax revenue for the city may not necessarily be true. Respectfully submitted, Gary Sullivan Councillor for the City of Saint John Representing Ward 2 SAINT JOHN P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, NB Canada E21L 4L1 I www.saintjohn.ca I C.P. 1971 Saint John, N. -B. Canada E21- 4L1 170 C August 24, 2011 Your Worship Mayor Ivan Court and Members of Common Council It is important for any organization to measure themselves in order to spur growth from within. I believe that we have to review ourselves from time to time as any progressive organization should in order to meet tomorrows challenges. Each Councillor around this horse shoe has made motions in the last 31/2 years and before the end of this Council's mandate everyone should know where each Councillor's motion sits. I therefore move: That the Common Clerk provide a full record of all motions, whether completed or not, made by each Councillor over the last 38 months and where each motion, whether completed or not, now rests in Staffs agenda. (ie: completed, being worked on, etc...) I further resolve that the Common Clerk advise Council as to when this list will be completed, be it one, two or three months, so each Councillor can obtain the knowledge of what they must do to have their motions acted upon before the end of this Council's mandate of May 2012. Respectfully, Bill Farren Councillor The 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 4L1 171 X` . 1 August 29, 2011 Your Worship Mayor Ivan Court & Members of Common Council: Issue: Critical Need for a Full Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) to be Completed by the Department of Environment on the Proposed AIM / Saint John Port Authority / NB Power Above - Ground Power Corridor Context: • At the recent public meeting held at the Carleton Community Centre regarding this issue, numerous speakers raised the issue of possible health and environmental risks associated with this project. • Noise pollution, chronic illnesses, and the movement of hazardous materials were identified. • Mr. Gordon Dalzell, one of the most respected environmentalists in New Brunswick, stressed the need for a complete environmental impact assessment for this project. • With respect to due diligence —The City of Saint John must take every step to ensure the safety of its citizens. Motion: That The City of Saint John formally request, in written form, that the Provincial Department of Environment conduct a full environmental impact assessment regarding the proposed high voltage above - ground corridor being considered for the West Side of Saint John. Respectfully submitted, Peter McGuire Councillor —City of Saint John SAINT JOHN P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, NB Canada E2L 41_1 I www.saintjohn.ca I C.P. 1971 Saint John, N. -B. Canada E2L 4L1 172 :a August 29, 2011 Your Worship Mayor Ivan Court & Members of Common Council: Issue: West Saint John Unsightly Premises Context: • There continues to be 3 properties on the West Side of Saint John that continue to be in need of rehabilitation. • 1 have raised with staff these concerns from citizens on several occasions. • It appears we may need to craft a progressive by -law to remediate these properties. Motion: That the City Manager, working with the appropriate City staff, bring back to Council in two months' time a proposed by -law to deal with these unsightly properties, and others throughout the City. Respectfully submitted, (received by email) Peter McGuire Councillor — City of Saint John 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 173 REPORT TO COMMON COUNCIL M &C- 2011 -219 August 22, 2011 His Worship Mayor Ivan Court and Members of Common Council Your Worship and Councillors: SUBJECT: Traffic Impacts — Tim Hortons 222 Bayside Drive BACKGROUND: City of Saim John TDL Group has received a building permit and commenced construction of a new Tim Hortons outlet at 222 Bayside Drive located at the northwest corner of the Bayside Drive / Courtney Bay Causeway / Mount Pleasant Avenue East intersection. The property is zoned "I -2" Heavy Industrial and a restaurant is a permitted use in the "I -2" zone. The development meets all of the requirements of the "I -2" zone and City of Saint John Zoning By -Law, therefore no additional approvals were required beyond issuance of the Building Permit. On August 16, 2011 Common Council referred the above matter to staff for a report regarding the traffic impacts of the development. ANALYSIS: A traffic impact study was completed for the development in September 20091. As part of the study process, the engineering consultant who prepared the study on behalf of the developer met with Municipal Operations and Engineering staff to discuss concerns relating to the project. Staff identified two issues: provision of sufficient on -site space for queueing so that traffic queues from the site would not reach Bayside Drive, and provision of queueing space for left turning vehicles into the site so that the queue of vehicles making a left turn from Bayside Drive into the site would not reach the Bayside Drive / Courtney Bay Causeway intersection. Municipal Operations & Engineering also requested that the study ' ADI Limited. September 2009. Traffic Impact Study for a Tim Hortons on Bayside Drive. 174 M & C — 2011 — 219 - 2 - August 22, 2011 review the impacts that the One Mile House Interchange will have on the post - development traffic patterns at the site. The approved site plan for the development has the driveway located approximately 82 metres north of the Bayside Drive / Courtney Bay Causeway intersection. The separation distance between the driveway and the Bayside Drive / Courtney Bay Causeway intersection exceeds the minimum requirements of the City of Saint John Zoning By -law (30 metres) and the Transportation Association of Canada standards2 (70 metres). Driveway widths also meet City and Transportation Association of Canada standards. For vehicles accessing the drive through, sufficient queueing is provided on -site for up to 26 vehicles. Staff also note the existing driveway into the site, located a distance of 30 metres from the Bayside Drive / Courtney Bay Causeway intersection, will be closed. Estimated driveway volumes accessing the site were based on a similar sized Tim Hortons in Fredericton and are as follows: Estimated Driveway Volumes Enter Exit AM Peak Hour 168 vehicles 159 vehicles PM Peak Hour 95 vehicles 90 vehicles The Traffic Impact Study recommended the following modifications to the roadway network to improve post - development traffic operations in the Study Area: Adjust the traffic signal timings at the Bayside Drive / Courtney Bay Causeway intersection. This was recommended to improve both existing and post - development traffic operations at the intersection. Modifications include increased green time for vehicles making a left turn from Bayside Drive onto the Causeway and increased green time for through movements on Bayside Drive and the Causeway approaches to the intersection. Reconfiguring the existing pavement markings /lane designation in the southbound right turn lane on Bayside Drive to allow both through and right turn movements. This would reduce the overall queue length at the intersection providing increased separation between the end of the southbound traffic queue ( Bayside Drive heading from Loch Lomond Road towards the Causeway) and the Tim Hortons driveway. 2 Transportation Association of Canada. Geometric Design Guide for Canadian Roads. 1999 Edition. Figure 3.2.8.2. 175 M & C — 2011 — 219 - 3 - August 22, 2011 With projected 2012 post - development traffic volumes following completion of the One Mile House interchange, the southbound traffic queues are not projected to impact the driveway into the Tim Hortons site. The Study contained a third recommended improvement, unrelated to the development, to increase the storage length of the left turn lane on the Mount Pleasant Avenue East approach to the intersection. With these improvements, the Bayside Drive / Courtney Bay Causeway / Mount Pleasant Avenue East intersection is projected to operate with acceptable vehicle delays and volume -to- capacity ratios with 2012 post development traffic volumes. The intersection of the Tim Hortons Driveway and Bayside Drive is also projected to operate with acceptable vehicle delays and volume -to- capacity ratios with post development 2012 traffic volumes. Vehicles making a left turn from Bayside Drive into the site will be able to use the existing Two Way Left Turn Lane (TWLTL) on this section of Bayside Drive which will minimize impacts to through traffic on this portion of Bayside Drive and provide increased safety for vehicles making a left turn into the site as they are removed from the through traffic lanes. Traffic movements exiting the development and turning onto Bayside Drive are projected to operate with acceptable levels of delay and volume -to- capacity ratios during the morning and afternoon peak hours. Based on the analysis presented in the Traffic Impact Study the recommended signal timing and lane designation changes, combined with the proposed driveway location, are projected to minimize conflicts with traffic operations on Bayside Drive. The proposed driveway is in accordance with City and Transportation Association of Canada design and location criteria. Municipal Operations and Engineering will monitor traffic operations with respect to queue lengths following the opening of the new Tim Hortons location. RECOMMENDATION: The proposed development is permitted under the City of Saint John Zoning By- Law and conforms to all of the requirements stipulated therein. The proposed driveway location conforms to City and Transportation Association of Canada criteria. It is recommended that Common Council receive and file this report. 176 M & C — 2011 — 219 - 4 - August 22, 2011 Respectfully submitted, Ken Forrest, MCIP, RPP Commissioner Planning and Development J. Patrick Woods, CGA City Manager MR Project No. 177 REPORT TO COMMON COUNCIL M &C2011 -221 August 23, 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: Municipality of Saint John Four -Year Capital Investment Plan Respecting the "Gas Tax Fund Agreement" (2010 -2013) BACKGROUND New Brunswick Municipalities have been provided with a "Guidelines" package that includes instructions on the preparation of a Gas Tax Fund (GTF) Capital Investment Plan for 2010 -2013. Council approved the 2011 Water & Sewerage Utility Fund Capital Program on January 4, 2011 and the General Fund Capital Program on February 7, 2011. Included in the approved Capital Program submissions were a number of projects proposed to be funded under the 2010 -2013 Gas Tax Fund. The Water & Sewerage Utility Fund Capital Program also contained tentative capital plans for 2012 to 2015 which included proposed Gas Tax Fund projects. ANALYSIS Key to application under the Gas Tax Fund is the submission of a Four -Year Capital Investment Plan. This Capital Investment Plan must outline in detail, projects to be funded under the Gas Tax Fund Agreement that are considered as priorities by the Municipality. The Capital Investment Plan that staff are recommending be submitted, includes provision for twenty projects that otherwise would not have been possible in the years 2010 -2013 without the Gas Tax Fund Agreement. These twenty Water & Sewerage Utility Fund Capital Program and General Fund Capital Program projects total $28,365,528 of which $21,151,528 is proposed to be funded under the Gas Tax Program. While a Four -Year plan is a requirement, the Agreement also recognizes that plans do change. Provision has been made in the Agreement to allow the Municipality to update or modify their Capital Investment Plan at any time during the term of the Agreement subject to approval by the Province of New Brunswick Department of Local Government. 178 M &C2011 -221 August 23, 2011 Page 2 The attached Capital Investment Plan includes the following content: Project Descriptions, Expected Outcomes and Proposed Indicator(s) for each project related to the Utility Fund and General Fund Four -Year Capital Budgets. Utility Fund and General Fund Four -Year Budget Summaries. Baseline Calculation. Following approval of the Capital Investment Plan by Council, Department of Local Government for their review and approv the Province, they will forward a formal Gas Tax Agreement City. RECOMMENDATION staff will submit the Plan to the al. After approval of the Plan by for review and signature by the Consistent with the requirements of the Federal/Provincial Agreement related to the Transfer of Gas Tax Revenues, it is recommended: That the attached documentation representing Target Investment Levels by the General Fund and the Water & Sewerage Utility Fund for the years 2010 through 2013 including the Baseline Calculation be adopted, and that the listing of specific projects totaling $28,365,528 for the years 2010 to 2013 of which $21,151,528 in funding is being sought under the Gas Tax Fund be approved. Respectfully submitted, M. Paul Groody, P. Eng. Commissioner Municipal Operations & Engineering J. Patrick Woods, CGA City Manager 179 THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN 23- Aug -11 -- MUNICIPAL OPERATIONS & ENGINEERING 2010 - 2013 CAPITAL INVESTMENT PLAN SAINT JOHN GTF AGREEMENT Federal Gas Tax Revenue Funding 2011 - $11,986,528 2012 - $3,240,000 2013 - 55.925.000 Total: $21,151,528 Year Project Category Location Description GTF City Share 2011 Beach Infrastructure Renewal - Beach Crescent; Kennebecasis Installation of new sanitary sewer for separation as reccommended 800,000.00 0.00 Crescent/Meadowbank Sanitary Drive; Meadowbank Avenue in the Beach Crescent/Meadowbank Drainage Basin Study, Sanitary System including design and construction management services. Project to be funded under G.T.F. Champlain Heights Infrastructure Renewal - Champlain Heights Renewal of water pumping station, including design and 435,000.00 0.00 Pumping Station Water construction management services. Project to be funded under G.T.F. Honeysuckle, Storm Sand Cove Rd from Lawrence Install approx 694m of new storm piping and structures for 725,000.00 700,000.00 Sherbrooke Street St. to Cushing St., including separation in the area per the 2010 Drainage study, including Drainage Basin - Fundy Lawrence St and Young St design and construction management services. Project to be Heights funded under G.T.F. Honeysuckle, Storm Parking area of Lancaster Mall Install approx 400m of new storm piping and structures for 845,000.00 0.00 Sherbrooke Street and the bottom of Harding Street separation in the area per the 2010 Drainage study, including Drainage Basin - design and construction management services. Project to be Lancaster Mall Area funded under G.T.F. Long Wharf Wastewater Treatment Long Wharf Area Construction of Lift Station #10 and Forcemain/Collector System, 4,000,000.00 0.00 including construction management services. Project to be funded under G.T.F. Milford Drainage Basin - Storm Balmoral Crescent from Civic Install approx. 460m of new 200mm and 300mm storm sewer 515,000.00 0.00 Balmoral Crescent #345 to Dwyer Road and new and structures for separation in the area including 160m of new outfall at Civic #429 450mm storm outfall piping, including construction management services. Project to be funded under G.T.F. Milford Drainage Basin - Storm Kingsville Road from Civic Install approx. 300m of new 200mm and 300mm of new storm 390,000.00 0.00 Kingsville Road #288 to Milford Road and new sewer piping and structures for separation in the area and 140m of outfall to replace existing new 450mm outfall piping. Includes construction management services. Project to be funded under G.T.F. Milford Drainage Basin - Storm Russell Hill Road to Greenhead Install approx. 310m of new 900mm storm sewer and structures 500,000.00 0.00 Saint Clair Avenue Rd for separation in the area and new storm outfall near "X" Lift Station, including construction management services. Project to be funded under G.T.F. THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN 23- Aug -11 -- MUNICIPAL OPERATIONS & ENGINEERING 2010 - 2013 CAPITAL INVESTMENT PLAN SAINT JOHN GTF AGREEMENT # Federal Gas Tax Revenue Funding 2011 - $11,986,528 2012 - $3,240,000 2013 - 55.925.000 Total: $21,151,528 Year Project Category Location 2011 Milford Sanitary System Infrastructure Renewal - Dominion Park Road, Russell Sanitary Hill Road, Dwyer Road, Glenaire Avenue, Balmoral Crescent, Riverhill Drive, Saint Claire Avenue, Kingsville Raod, Gifford raod and Silvermount Crescent Description GTF City Share Renewal of various lengths of deteriorated sanitary sewer as 680,000.00 0.00 reccommended in the Milford Drainage Basin Study, including design and construction management services. Project to be funded under G.T.F. Rodney Terminal Storm Market Place pumping station to Renewal or structural lining of approx 380m of 2150mm diameter 1,721,528.00 1,615,000.00 outfall CMP. Project to be funded under G.T.F. (Design and approvals to be completed in 2010 for construction in 2011) Wastewater Pumping Infrastructure Renewal - Beach Crescent Sanitary Lift Reconstruction of inlet piping, control structures and outfall, 450,000.00 0.00 Facilities Sanitary Station including design and construction management services. Project to be funded under G.T.F. Wastewater Pumping Infrastructure Renewal - Kennebecasis Drive Lift Station Install Variable Speed Drives, including design and construction 125,000.00 0.00 Facilities Sanitary #2 management services. Project to be funded under G.T.F. Woodward Avenue Infrastructure Renewal - Donaldson Street to Alward Installation of approx. 220m of new 900mm saintary sewer, 800,000.00 0.00 Sanitary Street including design and construction management services. Project to be funded under G.T.F. 2012 Chesley Drive Wastewater Treatment Chesley Drive Area Construction of Lift Station #I OA and Forcemain/Collector 1,200,000.00 1,515,000.00 System, including construction management services. Project to be funded under G.T.F. with utility contribution. Storm Water Storm Boars Head Road Construction of stormwater detention pond on Caledonia Brook - 1,140,000.00 0.00 Management - High Pond "A ", including land acquisition, design and Brentwood construction management services. Subject to environmental approvals.. Project to be funded under G.T.F. Watermain Cleaning and Safe, Clean Drinking Various locations Cleaning and lining of existing unlined C.I. watermains to 900,000.00 0.00 Lining Phase 8 Water improve pressure, water quality, and fire flows. Project funded under G.T.F. THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN 23- Aug -11 -- MUNICIPAL OPERATIONS & ENGINEERING 2010 - 2013 CAPITAL INVESTMENT PLAN SAINT JOHN GTF AGREEMENT Federal Gas Tax Revenue Funding 2011 - $11,986,528 2012 - $3,240,000 2013 - S5.925.000 Total: $21,151,528 Year Project Category Location Description GTF City Share 2013 Beach Infrastructure Renewal - Millidge Avenue Construct new sanitary sewers and services as reccommended in 1,800,000.00 1,200,000.00 Crescent/Meadowbank Sanitary the Beach Crescent/Meadowbank Drainage Basin Study, including Sanitary System design and construction management services. Project to be funded under G.T.F. Reversing Falls Bridge - Safe, Clean Drinking Reversing Falls Bridge Renew existing 475mm watermain with two new 500mm 2,100,000.00 2,184,000.00 Water Transmission Main Water watermains including design and construction management services. Project funded under G.T.F. as a contingency plan should the project funding not be available under the SCDW program. Storm Water Storm Boars Head Road Construction of stormwater detention pond on Caledonia Brook - 1,125,000.00 0.00 Management - High Pond 'B ", including land acquisition, design and Brentwood construction management services. Subject to environmental approvals. Project to be funded under G.T.F. Watermain Cleaning and Safe, Clean Drinking Various locations Cleaning and lining of existing unlined C.I. watermains to 900,000.00 0.00 Lining Phase 9 Water improve pressure, water quality, and fire flows. Project funded under G.T.F. TOTAL: $21.151.528.00 $7.214.000.00 Capital Investment Plan for the GTF Agreement 183 Capital Investment Plan for the GTF Agreement CITY OF SAINT JOHN 8/26/2011 FOUR -YEAR CAPITAL INVESTMENT PLAN RESPECTING THE "GTF AGREEMENT" (2010 -2013) Page 2 / 27 ., Capital Investment Plan for the GTF Agreement INTRODUCTION 8/26/2011 The City of Saint John has prepared a four -year Capital Investment Plan for the years 2010 — 2013 respecting the GTF agreement. Included are descriptions, expected outcomes, proposed indicators, and cost estimates for each selected project. These various projects will lead towards cleaner air, cleaner water or lower greenhouse gas emissions. CAPITAL INVESTMENT PLAN CONTENT 1) Certified copy of the resolution from Council adopting the four -year Capital Investment Plan for the GTF Agreement of the municipality 2) Project Descriptions, Expected Outcomes and Proposed Indicators for each capital project related to the General Operating Fund Four -Year Budget 3) General Operating Fund Four -Year Budget Summary 4) Project Descriptions, Expected Outcomes and Proposed Indicators for each capital project related to the Water and Sewerage Utility Fund Four -Year Budget 5) Water and Sewerage Utility Fund Four -Year Budget Summary 6) Baseline Calculation 185 Page 3 / 27 Capital Investment Plan for the GTF Agreement 8/26/2011 MUNICIPALITY OF SAINT JOHN FOUR -YEAR CAPITAL INVESTMENT PLAN RESPECTING THE "GTF AGREEMENT" (2010- 2013) RESOLUTION 201X -XXX Moved by Councilor and seconded by Councilor "RESOLVED that the submitted documentation representing Target Investment Levels by the General Fund and the Water & Sewerage Utility Fund for the years 2010 through 2013 including the Baseline Calculation be adopted, and that the listing of specific projects totaling $28,365,528 for the years 2010 to 2013 of which $21,151,528 in funding is being sought under the Gas Tax Fund be approved." Motion Carried I certify that the above resolution of the council of session XCXYXX, 201X. (SEAL) CLERK MUNICIPALITY OF :. was adopted while in regular /special Page 4 / 27 Capital Investment Plan for the GTF Agreement General Operating Fund — Capital Budget 1) Honeysuckle, Sherbrooke Street Drainage Basin - Fundy Heights Area — Storm Sewer 8/26/2011 Project Description: Installation of new storm piping and structures for separation from the sanitary in the area per the 2010 Drainage Basin study. EIA Required ❑ Tender Required X❑ Expected Outcome: Cleaner Water This area is primarily residential and has been subject to flooding. Completion of all the projects in this area should alleviate the flooding. Proposed indicator(s): We will report on the length, diameter & type of pipe following completion of the project. Year Project Name GTF Total Cost Contribution 2011 =Honeysuckle, Sherbrooke Street Drainage Basin - Fundy Heights 725,000 1,425000 torm Sewer Page 5 / 27 187 Capital Investment Plan for the GTF Agreement 8/26/2011 2) Honeysuckle, Sherbrooke Street Drainage Basin - Lancaster Mall Area — Storm Sewer Project Description: Installation of new storm piping and structures for separation from the sanitary sewer in the area per the 2010 Drainage Basin study. EIA Required ❑ Tender Required X❑ Expected Outcome: Cleaner Water This area is primarily residential and has been subject to flooding. Completion of all the projects in this area should alleviate the flooding. Proposed Indicator(s): We will report on the length, diameter & type of pipe following completion of the project. Year 1�t Name GTF Total Cost Contribution 2011 =Hone�ysuckle, Sherbrooke Street Drainage Basin - Lancaster Mall 845,000 845,000 torm Sewer Page 6 / 27 No Capital Investment Plan for the GTF Agreement 3) Milford Drainage Basin - Balmoral Crescent Area — Storm Sewer 8/26/2011 Project Description: Installation of new storm piping and structures for separation from the sanitary in the area per the 2010 Drainage Basin study. EIA Required ❑ Tender Required X❑ Expected Outcome: Cleaner Water This area is primarily residential and has been subject to flooding. Completion of all the projects in this area should alleviate the flooding. Proposed Indicator(s): We will report on the length, diameter & type of pipe following completion of the project. Year Project Name GTF Contribution Total Cost 2011 Milford Drainage Basin - Balmoral Crescent Area — Storm Sewer 515,000 515,000 Page 7 / 27 :• Capital Investment Plan for the GTF Agreement 4) Milford Drainage Basin - Kingsville Road Area - Storm Sewer 8/26/2011 Project Description: Installation of new storm piping and structures for separation from the sanitary in the area per the 2010 Drainage Basin study. EIA Required F] Tender Required 0 Expected Outcome: Cleaner Water This area is primarily residential and has been subject to flooding. Completion of all the projects in this area should alleviate the flooding. Proposed Indicator(s): We will report on the length, diameter & type of pipe following completion of the project. Year Project Name GTF Contribution Total Cost 2011 Milford Drainage Basin - Kingsville Road Area — Storm Sewer 390,000 3909000 Page 8 / 27 190 Capital Investment Plan for the GTF Agreement 5) Milford Drainage Basin - Saint Clair Avenue Area — Storm Sewer 8/26/2011 Project Description: Installation of new storm piping and structures for separation from the sanitary in the area as per the 2010 Drainage Basin study. EIA Required ❑ Tender Required X❑ Expected Outcome: Cleaner Water This area is primarily residential and has been subject to flooding. Completion of all the projects in this area should alleviate the flooding. Proposed Indicator(s): We will report on the length, diameter & type of pipe following completion of the project. Year Project Name GTF Contribution Total Cost 2011 Milford Drainage Basin - Saint Clair Avenue Area — Storm Sewer 500,000 500,000 Page 9 / 27 191 Capital Investment Plan for the GTF Agreement 6) Rodney Terminal — Storm Sewer Outfall Project Description: Renewal or structural lining of 2150mm diameter CMP. EIA Required ❑ Tender Required X❑ 8/26/2011 Expected Outcome: Cleaner Water The existing outfall pipe is in poor condition and is showing signs of collapse. There have been occurrences of sink holes developing at the surface from soil migrating into the pipe. Renewal or structural lining will resolve the problem. Proposed Indicator(s): We will report on the length, diameter & type of pipe following completion of the project. Year Project Name GTF Contribution Total Cost 2011 Rodney Terminal — Storm Sewer Outfall 1,721,528 3,336,528 Page 10 / 27 192 Capital Investment Plan for the GTF Agreement 7) Storm Water Management — Brentwood Area — High Pond "A" Project Description: Construction of stormwater detention pond on Caledonia Brook - High Pond "A ". EIA Required FI Tender Required XD 8/26/2011 Expected Outcome: Cleaner Water This area is primarily residential and has been subject to flooding. The detention pond will allow the storage of storm water during a rain event and then release the water slowly to downstream systems in a controlled manner following the storm event. Completion of all the projects in this area should alleviate the flooding. Proposed Indicator(s): We will report on the length, diameter & type of pipe as well as the capacity (volume) of the detention pond following completion of the project. Year Project Name GTF Contribution Total Cost 2012 Storm Water Management — Brentwood — High Pond "A" 1,140,000 1,140,000 Page 11 / 27 193 Capital Investment Plan for the GTF Agreement 8) Storm Water Management — Brentwood Area — High Pond "B" 8/26/2011 Project Description: Construction of stormwater detention pond on Caledonia Brook - High Pond "B ". EIA Required FI Tender Required XD Expected Outcome: Cleaner Water This area is primarily residential and has been subject to flooding. The detention pond will allow the storage of storm water during a rain event and then release the water slowly to downstream systems in a controlled manner following the storm event. Completion of all the projects in this area should alleviate the flooding. Proposed Indicator(s): We will report on the length, diameter & type of pipe as well as the capacity (volume) of the detention pond following completion of the project. Year Project Name GTF Contribution Total Cost 2013 Storm Water Management — Brentwood Area — High Pond «B„ 1,125,000 1,125,000 Page 12 / 27 194 Capital Investment Plan for the GTF Agreement 8/26/2011 CITY OF SAIMTJCHN FOUR -YEAR CAPITAL BUDGET SUMMARY Part I - General Capital Fund Section SERVICES 2011 2012 2013 total Community Energy Systems Public Transit Solid Waste Local Roads and Bridges $7,011,528 $1,140,000 $1,125,000 $9,276,528 Honeysuckle, Sherbrooke Street Drainage Basin - Fundy Heights Area — Storm Sewer 1,425,000 1,425,000 Honeysuckle, Sherbrooke Street Drainage Basin - Lancaster Mall Area — Storm Sewer 845,000 845,000 Milford Drainage Basin - Balmoral Crescent Area — Storm Sewer 515,000 515,000 Milford Drainage Basin - Kingsville Road Area — Storm Sewer 390,000 390,000 Milford Drainage Basin - Saint Clair Avenue Area — Storm Sewer 500,000 500,000 Rodney Terminal — Storm Sewer Outfall 3,336,528 3,336,528 Storm Water Management — Brentwood — High Pond "A" $1,140,000 1,140,000 Storm Water Management — Brentwood Area — High Pond "B" $1,125,000 1,125,000 Total Capital Expenditures $7,011,528 $1,140,000 $1,125,000 $9,276,528 SOURCE OF FUNDS GTF Agreement $4,696,528 $1,140,000 $1,125,000 $6,961,528 Capital Reserve Fund Operating Fund Long Term Borrowing $2,315,000 $2,315,000 Others (specify) Total Sources of Funds $7,011,528 $1,140,000 $1,125,000 $9,276,528 Page 13 / 27 195 Capital Investment Plan for the GTF Agreement Utility Fund — Capital Budget 1) Long Wharf Area — LS #10 Project Description: Construction of Lift Station #10 and Forcemain /Collector System. EIA Required Fi Tender Required X❑ 8/26/2011 Expected Outcome: Cleaner Water Wastewater generated in this area currently flows untreated to the Harbour. Upon completion of the project the wastewater will be collected and pumped to a wastewater treatment facility for treatment. Proposed Indicator(s): We will report on the length, diameter & type of pipe as well as the lift station type following completion of the project. Year Project Name GTF Contribution Total Cost 2011 Long Wharf Area — LS #10 4,000,000 4,000,000 Page 14 / 27 196 Capital Investment Plan for the GTF Agreement 2) Champlain Heights Pumping Station 8/26/2011 Project Description: Upgrades to existing water pumping station including pump replacement and new diesel generator. EIA Required ❑ Tender Required X❑ Expected Outcome: Lower GHG The existing water pumping station requires upgrades. The upgrade will alleviate malfunctions and with modern equipment will ensure that spare parts are available. Proposed Indicator(s): We will report on the decrease in KWH consumed following completion of the project. Year Project Name GTF Contribution Total Cost 2011 Champlain Heights Pumping Station 435,000 435,000 Page 15 / 27 197 Capital Investment Plan for the GTF Agreement 3) Beach Crescent /Meadowbank Sanitary System 8/26/2011 Project Description: Installation of new sanitary sewer for separation as recommended in the 2010 Beach Crescent /Meadowbank Drainage Basin Study. EIA Required ❑ Tender Required X❑ Expected Outcome: Cleaner Water This area is primarily residential and has been subject to flooding. Completion of all the projects in this area should alleviate the flooding. Proposed indicator(s): We will report on the length, diameter & type of pipe following completion of the project. Year Project Name GTF Contribution Total Cost 2011 Beach Crescent /Meadowbank Sanitary System 800,000 800,000 Page 16 / 27 on Capital Investment Plan for the GTF Agreement 4) Milford Sanitary System 8/26/2011 Project Description: Renewal of various lengths of deteriorated sanitary sewer as recommended in the 2010 Milford Drainage Basin Study. EIA Required ❑ Tender Required X❑ Expected Outcome: Cleaner Water The sanitary sewers in this area are cracked and showing signs of collapse which impedes flow during peak periods resulting in flooding. Completion of all the projects in this area should alleviate the flooding. Proposed indicator(s): We will report on the length, diameter & type of pipe following completion of the project. Year Project Name GTF Contribution Total Cost 2011 Milford Sanitary System 680,000 680,000 Page 17 / 27 199 Capital Investment Plan for the GTF Agreement 5) Wastewater Pumping Facilities - Kennebecasis Drive Lift Station #2 Project Description: Install Variable Speed Drives. EIA Required ❑ Tender Required X❑ 8/26/2011 Expected Outcome: Cleaner Water Under current conditions the wastewater pumping station discharges sanitary flow at a high rate when the pumps are signaled to start at the "pump on" level in the wetwell. This high rate of flow causes downstream flooding. Following completion of the project the facility will pump at a constant controlled rate which should alleviate downstream flooding. Proposed indicator(s): We will report on the decrease in KWH consumed following completion of the project. Year Project Name GTF Contribution Total Cost 2011 Wastewater Pumping Facilities - Kennebecasis Drive Lift Station #2 125,000 125,000 Page 18 / 27 200 Capital Investment Plan for the GTF Agreement 6) Wastewater Pumping Facilities - Beach Crescent Sanitary Lift Station Project Description: Reconstruction of inlet piping,control structures and outfall. EIA Required ❑ Tender Required X❑ 8/26/2011 Expected Outcome: Cleaner Water Under current conditions the existing wastewater pumping facility bypasses wastewater frequently during peak flow events. Following completion of the project the occurrence of bypassing will be much less frequent. Proposed indicator(s): We will report on the length, diameter & type of pipe following completion of the project. Year P Name GTF Total Cost Contribution 2 Wastewater Pumping Facilities - Beach Crescent Sanitary Lift 450,000 450,000 Station Page 19 / 27 201 Capital Investment Plan for the GTF Agreement 7) Woodward Avenue — Sanitary Sewer 8/26/2011 Project Description: Installation of new sanitary piping and structures to remove a "bottle neck" in the sanitary system. EIA Required ❑ Tender Required X❑ Expected Outcome: Cleaner Water There have been flooding occurrences in this area due to the existing undersized sanitary system. Completion of all the projects in this area should alleviate the flooding. Proposed indicator(s): We will report on the length, diameter & type of pipe following completion of the project. Year Project Name GTF Contribution Total Cost 2011 Woodward Avenue — Sanitary Sewer E 800,000 800,000 Page 20 / 27 202 Capital Investment Plan for the GTF Agreement 8) Chesley Drive— LS #10A Project Description: Construction of Lift Station #10A and Forcemain /Collector System. EIA Required ❑ Tender Required X❑ 8/26/2011 Expected Outcome: Cleaner Water Wastewater generated in this area currently flows untreated to the Harbour. Upon completion of the project the wastewater will be collected and pumped to a wastewater treatment facility for treatment. Proposed indicator(s): We will report on the length, diameter & type of pipe as well as the lift station type following completion of the project. Year Project Name GTF Contribution Total Cost 2012 Chesley Drive — LS #10A 1,200,000 2,715,000 Page 21 / 27 203 Capital Investment Plan for the GTF Agreement 9) Watermain Cleaning and Lining Phase 8 8/26/2011 Project Description: Cleaning and lining of existing unlined C.I. watermains to improve pressure, water quality and fire flows. EIA Required ❑ Tender Required X❑ Expected Outcome: Cleaner Water Unlined cast iron watermains that were installed in the late 1800's and early 1900's (up until about 1960) are subject to a phenomenon called tuberculation - a buildup of material on the inside wall of the pipe. This buildup reduces the internal diameter of the pipe which in turn leads to a decrease in water pressure and available fire flows. In addition, tuberculation is a major contributor to water quality problems such as colour, increased iron content and reduced chlorine residual. Following completion of this project the cast iron watermains will have improved flow capacity, improved water quality and the service life of the candidate watermains will be appreciably extended. Proposed indicator(s): We will report on the length and diameter of cast iron watermains cleaned and lined following completion of the project. Year Project Name GTF Contribution Total Cost 2012 Vv- atermain Cleaning and Lining - Phase 8 900,000 900,000 Page 22 / 27 204 Capital Investment Plan for the GTF Agreement 10) Beach Crescent /Meadowbank Area - Sanitary System 8/26/2011 Project Description: Installation of new sanitary piping and structures for system separation in the Beach Crescent/Meadowbank area as per the 2010 Drainage Basin study. EIA Required ❑ Tender Required -1 Expected Outcome: Cleaner Water This area is primarily residential and has been subject to flooding. Completion of all the projects in this area should alleviate the flooding. Proposed indicator(s): We will report on the length, diameter & type of pipe following completion of the project. Year Project Name GTF Contribution Total Cost 2013 Beach Crescent /Meadowbank Sanitary System 1,800,000 3,000,000 Page 23 / 27 205 Capital Investment Plan for the GTF Agreement 11) Watermain Cleaning and Lining Phase 9 8/26/2011 Project Description: Cleaning and lining of existing unlined C.I. watermains to improve pressure, water quality and fire flows. EIA Required ❑ Tender Required X❑ Expected Outcome: Cleaner Water Unlined cast iron watermains that were installed in the late 1800's and early 1900's (up until about 1960) are subject to a phenomenon called tuberculation — a buildup of material on the inside wall of the pipe. This buildup reduces the internal diameter of the pipe which in turn leads to a decrease in water pressure and available fire flows. In addition, tuberculation is a major contributor to water quality problems such as colour, increased iron content and reduced chlorine residual. Following completion of this project the cast iron watermains will have improved flow capacity, improved water quality and the service life of the candidate watermains will be appreciably extended. Proposed indicator(s): We will report on the length and diameter of cast iron watermains cleaned and lined following completion of the project. Year Project Name GTF Contribution Total Cost 2013 W— atermain Cleaning and Lining — Phase 9 900,000 900,000 Page 24 / 27 NO Capital Investment Plan for the GTF Agreement 12) Reversing Falls Bridge — Water Transmission Main 8/26/2011 Project Description: Renew existing 475mm diameter watermain with two new watermains to be secured to the underside of the Reversing Falls Bridge. EIA Required FI Tender Required XD Expected Outcome: Cleaner Water The existing single watermain does not have the capacity to carry the necessary quantity of water to the West side of the City following reconfiguration of the City's water system to supply all potable water from a single water treatment plant in the Eastern portion of the City. The existing watermain is over 50 years old and is constructed of thin walled steel. There is a concern that an increase in pressure necessary to meet the requirements of the future servicing option could cause this existing watermain to rupture under certain conditions. Following completion of this project the new watermains will have the capacity (both structural and conveyance) to provide the necessary service under the City's future servicing option which includes a single water treatment plant in East Saint John. Proposed indicator(s): We will report on the length, diameter & type of pipe following completion of the project. Year Project Name GTF Contribution Total Cost 2013 Reversing Falls Bridge — Water Transmission Main 2,100,000 4,284,000 Page 25 / 27 207 Capital Investment Plan for the GTF Agreement 8/26/2011 CITY OF SAINT JOHN FOUR -YEAR CAPITAL BUDGET SUMMARY Part 2 - Public Utility Capital Fund Section SERVICES $14,190,000 2011 2012 2013 Total Water $19,089,000 Champlain Heights Pumping Station $435,000 $435,000 Watermain Cleaning and Lining — Phase 8 $900,000 $900,000 Watermain Cleaning and Lining — Phase 9 $900,000 $900,000 Reversing Falls Bridge — Water Transmission Main $4,284,000 $4,284,000 Wastewater Long Wharf Area — LS #10 $4,000,000 $4,000,000 Beach Crescent/Meadowbank Sanitary System $800,000 $800,000 Milford Sanitary System $680,000 $680,000 Wastewater Pumping Facilities - Kennebecasis Drive Lift Station #2 $125,000 $125,000 Wastewater Pumping Facilities - Beach Crescent Sanitary Lift Station $450,000 $450,000 Woodward Avenue — Sanitary Sewer $800,000 $800,000 Chesley Drive — LS #10A $2,715,000 $2,715,000 Beach Crescent/Meadowbank Sanitary System $3,000,000 $3,000,000 Total Capital Expenditures $7,290,000 $3,615,000 $8,184,000 $19,089,000 SOURCE OF FUNDS GTF Agreement Capital Reserve Fund Operating Fund Long Term Borrowing Others (specify): Bridge Financing Total Sources of Funds $5,879,236 $4,147,882 $4,162,882 $14,190,000 $4,899,000 $4,899,000 $1,410,764 - $532,882 - $877,882 $0 $7,290,000 $3,615,000 $8,184,000 $19,089,000 1: Page 26 / 27 Capital Investment Plan for the GTF Agreement Base Amount Base Amount Calculation Table YEAR TOTAL 2005 18,889,952 2006 22,174,408 2007 19,065,106 2008 26,189,772 2009 24,498,855 AVERAGE 22,163,619 209 8/26/2011 Page 27 / 27 OPEN SESSION August 25, 2011 His Worship Mayor Ivan Court and Members of Common Council Your Worship and Councillors: Subject: CAPITAL FINANCING The attached Notice of Motion has been prepared as a first step in the permanent financing of certain Capital Projects. The purpose of the issue is summarized on the attached schedule. The giving of this Notice of Motion does not commit the City to any further action. It does, however, place the City in a position to take action after the expiry of 30 days at such time as bond market conditions and opportunities permit. At this stage, it is not necessary to set limits with respect to the coupon rate or the terms for which bonds are to be issued. These will be established at a later date and will be related to the market conditions at that time. Respectfully sub Gp6gory Commis lr SAINT JOHN mans, CGA, MBA of Finance P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, NB Canada E2L 4L1 I wwwsaingohn.ca I C.P. 1971 Saint John, N. -B. Canada E2L 4L1 210 NOTICE OF MOTION His Worship the Mayor gave the following Notice of Motion. "I do hereby give Notice that I will, at a meeting of Common Council held after the expiration of thirty days from this day, move or cause to be moved, the following resolution: Namely, RESOLVED that occasion having arisen in the public interest for the following Public Civic Works and needed Civic Improvements, that is to say: (Details to be read from "Purpose of the Issue ")." THEREFORE RESOLVED that debentures be issued under provisions of the Acts of Assembly 52, Victoria, Chapter 27, Section 29 and amendments thereto, to the amount of $ 11, 500, 000. 211 The City of Saint John Proposed issue of Debentures To Be Dated On or After September 28, 2011 Purpose of Issue GENERALFUND Transportation Services $ 500,000 Economic Development $ 1,000,000 Parks and Recreation $ 3,000,000 4,500,000 WATER & SEWERAGE UTILITY Water System $ 2,500,000 Sewer System $ 4,500,000 7,000,000 TOTAL $ 11,500,000 212 REPORT TO COMMON COUNCIL M &C2011 -223 August 25, 2011 His Worship Mayor Ivan Court & Members of Common Council Your Worship and Members of Council, SUBJECT: Contract No. 2011 -5 — Milford Storm Sewer Separation — Phase I BACKGROUND The City of Saint John The 2011 General Fund and Water & Sewerage Utility Fund Capital Programs include funding for storm sewer separation and sanitary sewer renewal projects in the Saint Clair Avenue and Kingsville Road areas. TENDER RESULTS Tenders closed on August 17, 2011, with the following results: 1. Galbraith Construction Ltd., Saint John, NB $ 1,426,896.20 2. Dexter Construction Company Ltd., Moncton, NB $ 1,526,827.75 3. H.E. Merchant & Sons Ltd, St. George, NB $ 1,561,089.35 4. Fairville Construction Ltd., Saint John, NB $ 1,743,126.70 5. Gulf Operators Ltd., Saint John, NB $ 2,096,248.31 The Engineer's estimate for the work was $1,642,170.24. ANALYSIS The tenders were reviewed by staff and all tenders were found to be formal in all respects with the exception of the tender submitted by H.E. Merchant and Sons Ltd. which contained a minor error in mathematics. The math error was corrected in accordance with Division 2 — Instructions to Tenderers and Tendering Procedures, Section 2.11 s) (i) and the corrected amount is 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. 213 M &C2011 -223 August 25, 2011 Page 2 FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The Contract includes work that is charged against three capital work projects. Assuming award of the Contract to the low tenderer, an analysis has been completed which includes the estimated amount of work on these projects that will be performed by City forces and others. The analysis concludes that a total amount of $1,632,000 was provided in the budgets and that the projected completion cost of the projects included in the contract is estimated to be $1,397,109.09, including the City's eligible H.S.T. rebate. This results in a $1,428.92 positive difference in the General Fund Capital Program and a $233,461.99 positive difference in the Water & Sewerage Utility Fund Capital Program. The remaining amount under the Water & Sewerage Utility Program for this project will be utilized for further sanitary sewer renewals in the Milford Sanitary System under a separate tender. POLICY — TENDERING OF CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS The recommendation in this report is made in accordance with the provisions of Council's policy for the tendering of construction contracts, the City's General Specifications and the specific project specifications. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that Contract No. 2011 -5 — Milford Storm Sewer Separation — Phase 1, be awarded to the low tenderer, Galbraith Construction Ltd., at the tendered price of $1,426,896.20 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 J. Patrick Woods, CGA City Manager 214 Planning Advisory Committee August 25, 2011 His Worship Mayor Ivan Court and Member of Common Council Your Worship and Councillors: P.O. Box 1971 506 658 -2800 Saint John New Brunswick Canada E2L 4L1 Wiw City of Saint John In the spirit of continuous improvement of serving the citizens on Saint John, the Planning Advisory Committee is coming to council with a specific request that, if approved, will enable PAC to enhance its decision making ability in two core areas. Core area 1- In the jurisdiction set out by the Community Planning Act, the PAC can impose conditions' of parcel or land rezonings. Standard conditions are often recommended in the City Planning Staff report and supported by the PAC. Based on individual cases, situations, and rational, the PAC is faced with imposing conditions where it is desired to have other views from city representatives in Building Inspection. Since it is the Building Inspection Staff that must enforce these conditions, it is desirable to hear their views on the enforceability in addition to the standard practice of reviewing written input. Secondly, in situations that merit additional leverage" to have property owners satisfy rezoning conditions, it is often Building Inspection that identifies these situations. In both of these situations, and in other situations during the PAC meetings, it is desired to have Building Inspection Staff present to answer questions to ensure the best outcome for the citizens of Saint John. Core area 2 —The Planning Advisory Committee and Planning Staff form a portion of the City's dealings with development within city. Through the planning and construction process of property development, Municipal Operations and Engineering forms another significant part. Developers and PAC alike seek clarity on specific issues during PAC proceedings from Municipal Operations and Engineering Staff. Significant protection of citizens and the city's assets comes from the work Municipal Operations and Engineering does. With this protection in mind, situations have arisen during PAC proceedings where the standard practice of reviewing Municipal Operations and Engineering written input is not sufficient and could benefit from discussions with Municipal Operations and Engineering Staff. For example, situations where Municipal Operations and Engineering's input was based on information, that in hearing from the developer during PAC proceedings is identified as being perceived by the developer as inaccurate, clarification from Municipal Operations and Engineering during the PAC proceedings will facilitate better decision making, and potentially avoid timely delays in construction. 215 During the August 16th, 2011 meeting of the Planning Advisory Committee, it was unanimously Moved, Seconded and Carried: To submit a written request for Council to direct the City Manager to instruct a member from the Building Inspection and Municipal Operations and Engineering and Engineering Department to be present at PAC meetings once a month to explain and clarify recommendations as needed. Respectfully, /I Murray PAC Chairman CC: Bill Edwards, Commissioner of Buildings and Inspections Paul Groody, Commissioner of Municipal Operations Ken Forrest, Commissioner of Planning and Development Section 39 Conditions An example of additional leverage is financial security, or a Bond. 216 Friends of Rockwood Park Inc. and Saint John Fundy Chapter, Conservation Council of New Brunswick August 25, 2011 Mayor and Council City of Saint John 15 Market Square Saint John NB Mayor and Council: Regarding the restoration of property 1671 Sandy Point Road located in Rockwood Park overlooking and adjacent Harrigan Lake, we request that before any planning occurs for the restoration of this property that an advisory committee be established to plan and oversee the restoration work. Friends of Rockwood Park and the Saint John Fundy Chapter of the Conservation Council of New Brunswick wish to actively participate on the restoration committee which we trust you will move to establish. As you know, our groups have been involved with issues in the protection of Rockwood Park for the past several years. In another matter of immediate concern on property 1671 Sandy Point Road is a large drain pipe which discharges to a small brook running directly into Harrigan Lake. We request that this pipe be removed from the property without delay. Removal of the pipe is not a matter to wait for the restoration but needs to be removed now as it has a continuing negative impact on the lake. We also wish to thank Mayor and Council for the recent decision to rezone the other five properties along Sandy Point Road to P -2 (parkland). Signed, 12" �' �—' � � , 4—� �-�c �2' t - � Ernestine Rooney 506 - 652 -3597 for Friends of Rockwood Park David H. Thompson 506 - 635 -1297 for Saint John Fundy Chapter, Conservation Council of New Brunswick 217