Search Results for: pac

[…] Input from Other Sources: Operations , KVFD, KRPF , Anglophone South District School Board RECOMMENDATION: PAC HEREBY removes from the TABLE the rezoning application of the lands located off Chapel […]

https://www.rothesay.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/4-2021July2StaffRpt.pdf

PDF document

[…] building by development agreement. The typical procedure for a rezoning is that Council receive from PAC a recommendation to hold a Public Hearing and that both the rezoning (by­ law […]

https://www.rothesay.ca/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/7-Sept-28-2022StaffRpt-with-TrafficStudy_Redacted.pdf

PDF document

[…] mixed used commercial apartment building Input from Other Sources: Director of Operations , KVFD RECOMMENDATION: PAC HEREBY removes from the TABLE the rezoning application for 145 Hampton Road . ORIGIN: […]

https://www.rothesay.ca/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/3-2022Mar2PACStaffRpt145Hampton.pdf

PDF document

[…] Memorandum from Town Manager Jarvie 8 May 2024 Recommendation from the Planning Advisory Committee ( PAC) 3 May 2024 Staff Report to PAC with attachments 2024May13OpenSessionFINAL_00O ROTHESAY Regular Council Meeting […]

https://www.rothesay.ca/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/2024May13-OpenSessionFINAL_Redacted.pdf

PDF document

[…] in a form acceptab le to the Development Officer to the Planning Advisory Committee ( PAC) along with the applicable fee. Before granting or rejecting a variance the PAC may […]

https://www.rothesay.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/4-10-Subdivision-BylawFINAL.pdf

PDF document

[…]  I  am  writing  to plead  with the  Town  of   Rothesay  to  keep  as  many  green  s paces  as  possible  for  our  residents.   I am  specifically  referencing  Spy  Glass  and  the   Hillside […]

https://www.rothesay.ca/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/2023February13OpenSessionFINAL_Redacted-optimized.pdf

PDF document

[…] on April 12, 2021. The standard procedure for a rezoning is that Council receive from PAC a recommendation to hold a Public Hearing and that both the rezoning (by-law amendment) and the development agreement be prepared in advance ofthe public hearing. Staff note that Municipal Elections are scheduled for May 10, 2021 and for that reason no Council meeting will be held until the newly elected Council is sworn into office. The date of the swearing into office will be potentially delayed as the Act Respecting Municipal General Elections in 2021 states that due to the pandemic the reporting of results will be delayed until all electors in the suspended parts of the province have had the opportunity to cast a ballot. Furthermore, the Local Governance Act Part 56(1) (Restriction on powers of outgoing council) states that during the period beginning on election day and ending on the day of the first meeting of an incoming council, the Council can continue the day-to-day activities of the municipality but shall not enact, amend or repeal a by-law, or become a party to any agreement, or contract. For that reason Staff will continue to process the application by conducting polling, preparing a draft by-law amendment and development agreement, and forwarding a supplemental staff report to PAC once the election results are finalized and a new Council is sworn into office. BACKGROUND The property is currently zoned General Commercial (GC) this zone is intended to apply to larger commercial operations, such as large commercial retail stores, hotels, shopping centers, car dealerships and self-storage facilities. The proposed use as a residential apartment building is not listed as a permitted use within the GC zone. However, the Municipal Plan By-law 1-20 does contain policy direction (see Policy HDR-4 follows) that would allow Council to consider the application. 2 2021July12OpenSessionFINAL_164 The commercial areas in Rothesay are focal points for residents, whether they are shopping or socializing. Council recognizes this function of commercial space as potential opportunity sites where higher densitv residential mav be added as a means of providing people with better access to the Town’s services, to reduce sprawl, to permit a livelihood that allows for walkability and less car dependence, and to increase density in and around the Town’s commercial areas. COUNCIL SHALL: Policy HDR-4 High-density Residential: Consider that High-density Residential (R6) development may be appropriate throughout the Commercial Designation, and may consider multi-unit dwellings through the re-zoning and development agreement process where such development demonstrates compliance with the following requirements: a) Subject lands are adjacent to or in close proximity to collector or arterial streets and transit routes; b) The maximum density does not exceed 100 square metres of land per apartment unit; c) Subject lands are adequate in size relative to the intensity and scale ofthe proposed land development; d) The subject lands do not exceed 1 acre in total area (or 40 apartment units); e) Underground parking is provided; f) Require the developer provide a technical wind and shadow study, to be completed by a certified professional, to ensure the proposed development does not generate excessive wind or cast a shadow on abutting properties or public road right-of-way that would detract from the quality, enjoyment, or use of the space. g) Require the developer to complete a traffic impact assessment for the proposed development on the surrounding area completed by a qualified transportation engineer or other technical specialist; h) Excellence in site design best practices addressing features such as Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles, urban design, and high quality landscaping; and i) A building design of high quality that is consistent with community values and architectural best practices. 3 2021July12OpenSessionFINAL_165 ANALYSIS: Policy HDR-4 High-density Residential Staff Comment Subject lands are ad.iacent to or in close proximity to collector or arterial streets and transit routes; The maximum density docs not exceed 100 square meters of land per apartment unit; Sub .iect lands arc adequate in size relative to the intensity and scale of the proposed land development; The subject lands do not exceed 1 acre in total area (or 40 apartment units); The proposed building is located 250 meters from Marr Road with access Chapel Road. A traffic impact statement is being prepared to determine any additional traffic enhancement or The property is 5,973 square meters in area and proposed density at 48 units does not exceed the 100 meters of land per apartment unit. The proposed 4-story building would be located in a mixed-use development area containing light industrial, commercial and institutional uses. The site shares a property boundary and driveway with an existing commercial plaza, and bank property (Bayview Credit Union). The site also backs onto the Rothesay Ballet School and Urban Landscaping. The nearest low density properties are located in the Chapel Hill Estates development approximately 200 feet from the ~~~~ n~Ph>r=~~·~=lo=c=at~io~n~·————~~ The density at 48 units would exceed the 40- apartment unit limit on density. However, the applicant also intends to make use of POLICY R- 1 and R-2 that permit Council to consider an increase in density by 2 percent for every 4 2021July12OpenSessionFINAL_166 Excellence in site design best practices addressing features such as Crime Prevention through Environmental Design apartment unit meeting affordability standards or constructed as an accessible unit. The applicant is proposing 2 accessible units and 8 affordable units and therefore would be eligible for an increase in density of 20% (8 additional units). The proposal includes underground parking for 37 vehicles and 24 surface parking spaces for 61 parking spaces. The total number of parking spaces complies with the zoning by-law calculated at 1.25 spaces per apartment unit. The developer has provided a technical shadow study of the proposed building. The results of the study show that the scale of the building would not create excessive shadows on the adjacent commercial and institutional land uses. The developer is preparing a traffic impact assessment. Staff intend to review the study by understanding how the apartment building development adheres to good planning principles to ensure safe and equal access to the transportation system by all users, including vehicles of residents and their guests, foot traffic of residents and their guests to and from the building to a public sidewalk or other destination (bank/restaurant), cyclists, and the loading and unloading commercial trucks (garbage, moving vans, delivery vehicles, etc.). Two major concerns will be looking to understand better are the as follows: Identification of transportation system improvements (traffic lights) at the Marr Road/Chapel Road intersection. Assessments of parking and access issues related to the existing commercial complex parking lot (Bayview Credit Union, Golden Fry, Legion, etc.) One of the key features of CPTED is the placement of physical features, activities and people in a way that maximizes visibility as a key concept directed toward keeping intruders easily 5 2021July12OpenSessionFINAL_167 DENSITY INCENTIVE POLICY: observable, and therefore less likely to commit criminal acts. Features that maximize the visibility of people, parking areas and building entrances are unobstructed doors and windows, pedestrian-friendly sidewalks and streets, front porches and appropriate nighttime lighting. Staff note that because the proposed building would share a property boundary with a commercial parking lot it will be very important to define property lines with landscaping or decorative fencing such that commercial visitors do not use or confuse the building as a commercial property. Good design responds and contributes to the neighbourhood context. Staff review the building design based on the natural and built features of the local neighbourhood, and the relationship and the character they create when combined with the proposed building. The area has some challenges in that the NB Power infrastructure does not create an attractive view for residents; however, the proposed building will be an attractive enhancement for the Staff believe that the proposed building in this mixed-use neighbourhood achieves good design as the scale, bulk and height of the building is appropriate to the existing or desired future character of Chapel Road and surrounding As noted above the applicants ‘ proposed density at 48 units would exceed the 40-apartment unit limit on density. However, the applicant also intends to make use of POLICY R-1 and R-2 that permit Council to consider an increase in density by 2 percent for every apartment unit meeting affordability standards or constructed as an accessible unit. The applicant is proposing 2 accessible units and 8 affordable units and therefore would be eligible for an increase in density of20% (8 additional units). Policy R-1 regard Affordable Housing states the Council can “Consider an increase in the maximum allowable density by 2 percent for every dwelling unit meeting affordable housing standards as defined by the Canadian Housing and Mortgage Corporation (CHMC) or an equivalent recognized standard , not exceeding 20 percent as determined in the Zoning By-law” . The applicants are proposing that 8 residential rental units will be 10% below their potential residential rental income as supported by an appraisal report or qualified financing representative that is part of the 6 2021July12OpenSessionFINAL_168 lending team; or the 8 apartment units must be affordable with rents at or below 30% of the median household income in Rothesay. One point of concern that Staff identified is that median incomes in Rothesay are relatively high and therefore the rents would not target households with incomes below the median. For example, the Statistics Canada reported median incomes for Rothesay are as follows: 2015 Median Household Income $88,623.00 2015 Single Parent Median Income 30% of total $26,586.90 $53,376.00 $16,012.80 Monthly Rental Max Budget $2,215.58 $1,334.40 Staff are concerned that the proposed methodology could result in rents between $1300 and $2200 and be deemed “affordable”. For that reason, Staff will be recommending that the development agreement specify that the developer enter into the Affordable Rental Housing Program or Provincial Rent Supplement Assistance Program with the Province of New Brunswick. Staff have consulted with CMHC and the Province of NB to determine the most effective method of determining an affordable rental rate. Furthermore, Staff will investigate and present within the development agreement an effective approach to ensuring the agreed rental rates are monitored. The applicants also intend to construct 2 accessible apartment units to utilize Policy R-2 regarding Age­ Friendly Housing that states Council can “Consider an increase in the maximum allowable density by 2 percent for every dwelling unit designed and constructed in conformance with Universal Design Best Practices, as defined by the Universal Design Network of Canada or an equivalent recognized standard, not exceeding 20 percent as determined in the Zoning By-law.” Universal design is an international design philosophy that enables people to continue living in the same home by ensuring that apartments are able to change with the needs of the occupants. Universally designed apartments are safer and easier to enter, move around and live in. They benefit all members of the community, from young families to older people, their visitors, as well as those with permanent or temporary disabilities. A universally designed apartment provides design feature such as wider circulation spaces, kitchens and laundry rooms designed for accessibility with easy to reach and operate fixtures and appliances. Staff will be able to enforce the construction of a universally designed apartment unit through the building permit process. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT: Staff will prepare a development agreement for PAC’s review before proceeding to Council. A development agreement is a contract between Rothesay and the property owners that specify the details and obligations of the individual parties concerning the proposed development. Implementation Policy IM-13 states that Council shall consider development agreement applications pursuant to the relevant policies ofthe Municipal Plan (See Policies HDR-4, R-1, and R-2) and consideration of the following: Im lementation Polic IM-13 StaffReview A. That the proposal is not premature or ina ro riate b reason of: 7 2021July12OpenSessionFINAL_169 Im lementation Polic y IM -13 1) The financial capability of Rothesay to absorb any costs relating to the development; 2) The adequacy of municipal wastewater facilities, storm water systems or water distribution systems; 3) The proximity of the proposed development to schools, recreation or other municipal facilities and the capability of these services to satisfy any additional demands; 4) The adequacy of road networks leading to or within the development; and 5) The potential for damage or destruction of designated historic buildings and sites. B. that controls are placed on the proposed development so as to reduce conflict with any ad.iacent or nearby land uses b reason of: 1. Type of use; 2. Height, bulk and lot coverage of any ro osed buildin ; 3. Traffic generation, access to and egress from the site, and parking; open stora e; and 4. Si na e. C. That the proposed development is suitable in terms of the steepness of grades, soil and geological conditions, proximity to watercourses, or wetlands and lands that arc vulnerable to noodin . Staff Review Staff note that Policy DEVC-1 requires that developers pay for I 00 percent of infrastructure costs to service their proposal as well as I 00 percent of cost of minimum upgrades to local infrastructure that falls outside their project boundaries but is directly necessary for the development. Staff are concerned about the need for traffic lights, and note that the developer would be responsible to absorb these costs pursuant to DEVC-I. Staff believe that the municipal infrastructure is adequate for the proposed development. Staff have sent the development to the Anglophone South School District for review. Staff believe the municipal facilities are adequate for the proposed development. The applicant is completing a traffic study. Staff are concerned about the potential need for system improvements (traffic lights) at the Marr Roa d/Cha~el Road intersection . There are no historic buildings or sites identified within the project’s vicinity . The multi-unit residential is a compatible use with the surrounding bu~s;"'in~e;;;:.s:;;;:se;;;;;s;;;;;;. =~=== The height, volume and lot coverage does not L~~~~~ ~!?.Y..~ ~uses . A traffic study is underway, that will include assessments of parking and access issues related to the existing commercial complex parking lot. No commercial si a e is regue=s=te=d~. =====~ The site is suitable for development and will be subject to geotechnical approval during the building permit approval process. KENNEBECASIS REGIONAL POLICE FORCE Staff requested that KRPF review and comment on the proposed development. The KRPF stated that the intersection of Chapel Road and the Clark Road experiences a large volume of traffic not just during 8 2021July12OpenSessionFINAL_170 the day but also for the morning and evening peak commute times. The existing residential and rental properties coupled with vehicles that circumvent the Marr Road intersection through this route to and from the Hampton Road, becomes quite challenging in exiting onto the Marr Road. An additional 48- unit apartment complex with a proposed number of 64 parking spaces would add to this current volume. Traffic lights at the intersection of Chapel Road and the Marr Road would definitely mitigate this congestion and improve safety, not just in allowing the movement of vehicles to and from Chapel Road, but could also slow down the north/southbound Marr Road traffic where speeds can be quite high at times. The KRPF also reviewed the project with Crime Prevention through Environmental Design principles and they agree that from a CPTED point of view that the apartment proposal seems to have good sight lines and may offer some deterrence to possible criminal activity to nearby businesses. KENNEBECASIS VALLEY FIRE DEPARTMENT: As is required by Municipal Plan Policy FR-7, the KVFD must review proposals for new development projects to ensure that public safety and firefighting concerns are addressed. The KVFD is currently reviewing the proposal and will forward their comments once that review is complete. POLLING: Staff will prepare a polling notification letter to be sent to surrounding property owners. The applicant has solicited letters of support for the project and these are included in Attachment D. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommend the Planning Advisory Committee consider the following MOTION: A. PAC HEREBY tables the application for a 48 unit apartment building located off Chapel Road pending the receipt of a supplemental staff report containing the following: 1. Traffic impact assessment results and review; 2. Polling results; 3. Review by KVFD; and 4. Draft development agreement and rezoning By-law. Map 1 Attachment A Attachment B Attachment C Attachment D Location Map Proposed Development Engineering Plans (Servicing, Stormwater, Erosion Control) Shadow Study Developer’s Polling Letters of Support ~ Report Prepared by: Brian L. White, MCIP, RPP Date: Friday, April 30, 2021 9 2021July12OpenSessionFINAL_171 Vacant Land off Chapel Road (PID 30206882) 4/19/2021, 3:01 :35 PM f” ~ Rothesay Boundary [ I Property Civic Address 0 I 0 0.01 0.02 1:2,257 0.03 I 0 .04 0.05mi 0.08 km T he Town of Rotheaay does not W8/T8nt the accuracy or compteteneaa of the information , text, graphi cs, finks or other i tems contained wit hin the materials . 2021July12OpenSessionFINAL_172 COMEAU • MACKENZIE ARCHITECTURE 183 CHARLOTTE STREET, SAINT JOHN , NB E2L OC7 TEL: (508) 857·1611 macl!.archQnbnet.nb .ca 48-UNIT APARTMENT CHAPEL ROAD, ROTHESAY, NB April2021 2021July12OpenSessionFINAL_173 SITE AREA:: 64,302 sqlft (5,949 sqlm) BUILDING AREA:: 14,486 sqlft (1,346 sqlm) SURFACE PARKING = 24 spaces TOTAL PARKING SPACES = 64 @ esneoSfp sae pt .w S1 SCALE; 1:250 CHAI’ELROAD 41 UNIT APARTMENT ROTHESAY. NB PROPOSED SITE PLAN 2021July12OpenSessionFINAL_174 PARKADE PARKING= 37 spaces SURFACE PARKING = 24 spaces TOTAL PARKING SPACES= 61 @ paoposEp SITE P’ &N 51 SCALE : 1 : 250 RESIDENTIAL 4 STOREY 48 UNIT BUILDING PROPOSED LOCATION PARKADE 37 CARS CHAPS. ROAD 41 UNrT APARTMENT AOTHESA Y, H8 2021July12OpenSessionFINAL_175 @ pBOeoSFp FIRST Fl OQR PLAN A1 SCAUO s”• 1′ ® PROPOSED SECOND, THIRD 2 & FOURTH fLOOR pLAN A1 ..,.,., if·•· •COMEAU MACKENZIE -~ ~~= .. ~.~J!~} .. u.~~ . …. ,_ , …….. — …. ·- CIIAPEI.AOAD ol8 UMT APARTNENT ROnt E SAY, N8 PROPOSED FLOOR FUN ., 2021July12OpenSessionFINAL_176 … n . … … I I I )-i<—'1! !::’ .. – I •• ,_ .§- [-trz – ~ .. .. – – .. I I 57 I I I I I ! .. ! I I .. Slonn ~~ ….. Sanllaty ! ~ ! 7 6 5 4 2 :-:- –~ : 1 ol -Mo., -L~~j– ~ Q suR,Ys & ~ _ , ;;::-j ENGINEERING L TO. l ‘ 1——:=::::—–1 F ·-t _ AlltllmllplpiiDM!III_….wlhhTowncf~ ……….. d … -.w”*”IOI’Ih ……. 2 . Slllnft..,…to .. iOOIIwN!IIPCVDR35fwHIII)"'~-.IIIh T_al,_._, ……… “‘*-….._,.._ 1 A1,._ … _..,.19t11Dttw-_.,….. ….. CMM57 .l. 4.. Aldlmi …….. IDtleJft”CIIIii:IDCSAA257.4_,ASTMCiflfllh ._..,,.,….on,……,ot.__DI'I……….,..~ 5. Alldonn–…DM~k'l— ….. hlo.lllof –II. AldDtm,..,._.._. … ~Dt.c:.t~IDoSTMAAI,._ 3011aperTownoiRoa…r~ 1. Al~–tollecfhC,.~~-~ ……….. hallodln–..w~r~,.TowndRoe-., ~ •. Alc:aEII … ..:I.ami’Ntfti:IIMI0 ….. “**””‘”1CIOrmlf’tdtMQ … 1 21111nrubtiW,.., …… twni&GDnCftiiiJc:oo. , ~ 12110 D’I:DI.Jol ~n….- M.11 – D.aM 11.11& c.s 7’50 1Mt:an.13 mnu .11 ‘M.m “”” trtiA a.m. 3 2 – .. ·– Luke Moffett -Apartment Building Chapel Road, Rolhesay, NB -Servicing Plan SheetC4ot6 Issued for Review O..of:2021.(M…CS …. B A 2021July12OpenSessionFINAL_181 10 9 7 6 5 4 F E 0 c B A 10 9 B 6 5 4 3 Stonnwatar Management Notaa SIDI'm.-modllllcl~lt;OI:adV10.00.,…..,~ a.USDA,……~~s-tc:.MIOIDII~SC$). 2 1.wort …… ~~.- .. CiyoiS.Jotln&Dnn0.,.~ Cllllti ….. Mircft7, 2011**’- 2. z lnd Z.Chr Ct*agD AmlllllllluiiDn u.d. •1DO,….um(24nr)·tcltll”*”-11:11tnm • 5,_.8bln(241w)·IDCII~ 11!inm S.WSRado•0.2 4 ……………… COnlaln.21-..[nonMI)IIIInlltlana) 5.~c:BhrnMtcnn.g.~IMII:h~ – Aow to Rooftop Pond 3P …… O.D311 D.o5Za 0.11021 O.DDSI Aow to Chapel Pond (Total Post·Devalopment ) — …. ,.., ‘* Tc:C”*’I 1:5yr(m’la) t:10DV’1m’tll “‘ .. … OJXJ31 O.G133 … “‘ .. 0.0001 O.G021 … .. •• …,., 0,0311 … 13 u 0-1 0.11210 “”‘ .. 1A …… …, .. –~ ..,.. …,. Ctla!IIIRa.dPond(1+~ 3P) — …. ,.., CN TcC”*’I t:5yr(rft”N) 1 :100Y'(rn”11) .. ,. .. o ….. 0.1242 –~ o ….. 0 .1242 “””””””””” 3 2 o~·:o~ Q SURVEYS& ~ ENGINEERING LTD. -~o.wn.g. … —- ~~–·-~- ~·· ~- ….. Approll.5~toodlml -·-·- ,.__zo,..IDocllmlt Approll.100,…toodlml – -@ 0 -~-~~ …….. ® ~ar._.-..,. l!’ ——– ____M -……………………………… ~ . ~ ~- ………….. _.,_,_.. … ___ …_….,. _…. . ….,.~ ……. :::::::- ……. -.. ………. __ …,. ….. _….. …….. ” ‘ 7 6 5 3 2 Luke Moffett -Apartment Building Chapel Road, Ro thesay , NB – Erosion and Sedimentation B Control Plan A ShaatC6ot6 Issued lor Review O..ut:ZOZ1.ot.CI …. 2021July12OpenSessionFINAL_183 CHAPEL ROAD -48-UNIT APARTMENT ROTHESAY, NEW BRUNSWICK ROTHESAY, NB SUN ANGLES 45.35°N LATITUDE SOLAR NOON Summer Solstice June 21 68° Equinoxes March 21 45° September 21 Winter Solstice December 21 210 NOTES: 1. Sun times based on: Solar noon= 12:00 pm 8:00am = 4 hours BEFORE solar noon 4:00 pm = 4 hours AFTER solar noon (Daylight Savings Time not accounted for) 2. Sun angles measured from true horizon upwards to sun centre. 8:00AM/4:00PM 51° 28° Not Risen Set 4:40 @ 23r 3. Horizontal angles based on solar north/south, similar to GeoNB grid north. 4. Equinoxes set at March 21 and September 21, varying on a year-by-year basis. 5. Shade and shadow diagrams: Shown for June 21 and equinoxes only, 8:00 am/4:00 pm. AZIMUTHS SUNRISE SUNSET N54°E S305°W N89°E S271 °W N123°E s23rw 2021July12OpenSessionFINAL_184 PARKADE PARKING= 37 spaces SURFACE PARKING= 24 spaces TOTAL PARKING SPACES = 61 @ PBQPflSEQSIICAAH S1 ~y;JW – JVI~I t ~1 _ IZ (X) ~ooW 2021July12OpenSessionFINAL_185 . …. @) . • c:?J..l~~ ?”fJ..lt>’f PARKADE PARKING= 37 space .L.– t T1 ~ , of SURFACE..PARKING = 24space$…. .,J [) ~ ‘-I TOTAL PARKING SPACES= 61- t9n 1 – L/ )6D- A I1 2021July12OpenSessionFINAL_186 PARKADE PARKING= 37 spaces SURFACE PARKING= 24 spaces TOTAL PARKING SPACES= 6r @ panPOSEQ $liE ptAN S1 SCN.f:. f’l50 2021July12OpenSessionFINAL_187 PARKADE”PARKING=37 space ~MiS n, “Z} J / S E.-P ~1 SURFACE-PARKING: 24 spaces ~ 'fO~ AL PARKING SPACES= 61 I~ H Q:) ~ @ pROPOSfbmrfptNJ. S1 ~ uas ::,-+ 2021July12OpenSessionFINAL_188 –·@>· • =~Haa-t?OIJJ cs-rur>{: PARKADE PARKING=37 spaces­ SURFACE PARKING= 24 spaces TOTAL PARKING SPACES=61 @ pHPfUSEP SITE PI At,! […]

https://www.rothesay.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/3-2021April30StaffRpt.pdf

PDF document

[…] development agreement; thus if the development agreement is declined by Council the approvals granted by PAC are nullified. Deputy Mayor Alexander questioned the timeline for construction of the sidewalk. Mr. […]

https://www.rothesay.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/2017July10Publicmeeting.pdf

PDF document

[…] requested by multiple organizations. However, your correspondence will be inclu ded in the Council agenda package for Monday, November 14, 2022, which will be posted to the Town website and […]

https://www.rothesay.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/2022November14-OpenSessionFINAL_Redacted.pdf

PDF document

[…] 2 -10 -35 6 Se pte mber 2023 Recomm endation from Planning Advisory Committee ( PAC ) 1 September 2023 Staff Re por t to PAC 4 August 2023 Staff […]

https://www.rothesay.ca/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/0-2023Sept11-2CampbellHrgAgenda.pdf

PDF document