The council for the Town of Saint Andrews has given first reading to the new municipal plan after receiving feedback from residents last month.
Xander Gopen, senior planner for the Southwest New Brunswick Service Commission (SNBSC), said much of the feedback was related to the zoning bylaw rather than the municipal plan.
“We would encourage council to keep going with the process,” he said during a regular council meeting on March 2.
Gopen said being able to hear residents’ thoughts on the zoning bylaw in its new form — reflecting changes made after the Feb. 11 public hearing of objections — would help council.
A municipal plan is a 10-year overarching guiding document around land use and development, typically accompanied by a more specific zoning bylaw. In New Brunswick, the Community Planning Act outlines what must be included in those plans.
The provincial government amalgamated several areas and mandated that local governments create new municipal plans and zoning bylaws by January 2028.
A survey was conducted by SNBSC in 2024 with around 200 residents responding. Gopen said the content in the municipal plan was structured on those survey results. SNBSC said it has held 12 public engagement sessions outside of meetings with council and the planning advisory committee.
On Feb. 11 it held a public hearing of objections that saw criticism about the plan’s use of density and zoning.
“You can’t find more important things in [a] community than talking about land and [the] future,” said SNBSC planning director Alex Henderson. “Of course these things are going to be very heated.”
Henderson said some feedback centred around how confusing the document was, so they made simple changes to ensure accessibility, noting things can get technical.
“A lot of valid criticisms,” he said. “It’s not massive substantive changes, but when it gets to the zoning, there are some large substantive changes, and that came out of the PAC recommendations.”
Henderson said the changes relate largely to the Rural Resource Zone, labelled in the zoning bylaw as R3. At the public hearing of objections, rural residents expressed the restrictions placed on their land was far more than that of the urban area.
“What planners have to do is we have to balance what we have with provincial statutes and laws with what the community is saying they want for future direction and look at something that is in the public interest … and recommend that professionally to council,” he said. “So when we draft something that is our obligation.”
Henderson said concerns around infill development are valid, but PAC made recommendations on how to ensure those are done properly given the town’s national historic designation.
“Subdivision, if you’re in the town plat, there would be more community consultation if a subdivision was proposed and to have particular concern to architectural quality and compatibility with surrounding heritage properties,” he said.
Both Henderson and Gopen said they spoke with Parks Canada — which is responsible for historical designation at the federal level — and the department told them infill development would not impact that designation.
“We’re trying to look for this balance,” he said.
The Courier reached out to Parks Canada but did not receive a response by publication.
Housing affordability, Henderson explained, continues to be a high priority for residents in Saint Andrews.
Chief Administrative Officer Chris Spear said unlike other levels of government, when an election is called everything that the previous council has on the table continues with the implementation of a newly elected council.
In the federal and provincial levels, this is called caretaker mode. It is used to maintain the operation of government during an election period.
Coun. Annette Harland, who represents Chamcook, said putting the municipal plan up on the shelf would hinder the momentum of the process.
“There has been a lot of engagement, which I think we need to continue, support and facilitate … as opposed to saying to a new council, ‘dust all of this off and start again.’ I think that is irresponsible of us,” she said.
Harland said she would be uncomfortable stopping the process at this time.
Coun. Marc Blanchard said he would be concerned about doing all the legwork and not getting the plan passed.
“The feedback that we’ve received from almost every member of the community — [whether] I’ve read an email, at the public hearing of objections or the public meetings that we’ve had — has been to slow down and stop, they’re not ready,” he said.
Blanchard said he doesn’t believe council can get both the municipal plan and the zoning bylaw over the finish line before the May election.
“I would prefer to see the next council have as much input and be part of the discussions as much as possible, instead of us trying to force and move this through quickly just to get it done before the election,” he said.
Coun. Steve Neil agreed with Blanchard on getting the plan through the legislative process, saying there is plenty of time for community consultation and changes.
Changes can be made to a bylaw up until third reading. However, if council makes substantial changes to the plan after its initial notice, it must hold another public hearing of objections. This is under Section 111(7) of the Community Planning Act.
“I would not want to simply throw in the towel and pass this off,” he said.
He said there are common themes through the concerns raised by residents but said he believes there should be a second consultation meeting.
Coun. Lee Heenan said passing first reading doesn’t mean anything, and the council could choose to stop the process at any time.
“We can absolutely have the second public meeting,” he said. “All of these strides that we’re taking, if we do not hit the finish line, it will be less work for the next council.”
Coun. Kurt Gumushel said he, too, heard a desire from residents for more housing. He credited the planners for the significant workload associated with developing the plan.
“I do think we should continue to move forward to another public consultation and not table it at this time,” he said. “I think we have put a lot of time into this, if we don’t finish, I think that’s OK, but I don’t think we should stop.”
Council voted in favour of first reading by title. It also set March 24 as the public hearing of objections for the zoning bylaw.
