A new study on the Market Wharf and Square infill project shows there might be some impacts to the shoreline, but those are expected to be minimal, with some already mitigated by the project’s design.
It was commissioned by the municipal council in June, during the late stages of the process to deal with ongoing concerns from councillors and residents.
Garth Holder, an engineer from GEMTEC’s coastal division, presented the study. It was co-authered by another engineer who was not present during the meeting.
“Once you do infrastructure in a city like this … it’s Saint Andrews-by-the-Sea, not Saint Andrews-by-the-Landfill.” — Michel Caron, Saint Andrews resident
“GEMTEC consulting engineers were engaged by the Town of Saint Andrews to carry out the coastal study to support the design work,” he said presenting to the council on July 21.
According to Holder, his co-author made two separate site visits to the wharf areas as part of the study – one at low and high tide.
What were the findings
The study looked at several factors the infill could impact: like the water exchange rate, long-shore sediment transport, wave height, wind and flooding.
According to the design provided by the town in March 2025, the infill will extend out market square and help build up the lower third of the wharf, which is under a weight restriction.
It also intended to lift the wharf and market square above what is anticipated to be the sea level rise toward the end of this century.
Holder said the Saint Andrews harbour is protected by Navy Island and the various sandbars from offshore winds and waves.
“The waves that form are localized and are not influenced from the offshore,” he said.
He said the shoreline doesn’t protrude into the water, so it would have minimal impact on the flow patterns.
Holder explained there was a slight change in the water exchange rate, essentially how quickly water moves between different areas – but said when factoring in the infill, it is still efficient.
The study also showed there is likely to be longshore sediment transport – the movement of sand or sediment – on the corners of the infill.
“Because the seabed is mainly made of gravel and seaweed, there is expected to be no obvious changes to the shoreline,” he said.
In the end, he said the study concluded the new construction would have no impact on the shoreline.
What residents at the meeting said
New resident Michel Caron questioned the design and project entirely. He is also an international urban planner and owns a consulting firm.
“It’s a very technical study, but it tells me nothing about why it was designed this way,” he said.
The town began public consultation on the wharf in October 2023. At the time, there were five options. Those ranged from $5.37 million for a 21-month basic repair plan to more intricate solutions like rock infill, precast concrete blocks, steel piles, and timber dressing, costing between $6.06 million and $8.2 million with varying durations of time for completion.
In 2019, the council received funds from the federal government to repair the wharf, with the added intention to mitigate climate change.
At the time, the town told residents the federal government’s grant would not cover a simple repair. The town is expected to chip $2-million, while the grant is valued at roughly $6-million.
Caron questioned, if the plan was simply to prevent erosion, what had caused the design to reach out so far.
“Once you do infrastructure in a city like this … it’s Saint Andrews-by-the-Sea, not Saint Andrews-by-the-Landfill,” he said.
He argued the design makes the area less accessible to the water. Caron also asked about what the plan was for the expanded public space.
“Council must have had an idea what it would do with that additional space, it’s not plantable, you’re not making a garden, you’re making more public space but where is the plan for that,” he asked.
He said in his work, major changes to infrastructure like this have repercussions.
“Therefore, here, I think we’re affecting the identity of the town,” he said.
Others questioned the study itself and its methodology – and some of the findings.
Local resident Steve Saunders, who is also an mechanical engineer specializing in Computational Fluid Dynamics, questioned whether the model was 2D, the calibration of the wave height portion of the study, and whether someone came to take samples of the sediment.
Another local resident Alastair Fox, who is a master carpenter and has spent most of his life on water, shared his concerns as well.
“So, what I can see happening is you’re getting more sand coming around that point covering up the mud that is there – that is a whole ecological system on its own.”
He said he feels the sand will continue to smother out the microbes and small creatures living in the mud with the infill.
In May, local business owner Kevin Simmonds presented to the council in support of moving forward with repairing the wharf.
He said he felt, at the time, doing nothing was not an option. His business is one of four located around Market Square.
What the council has said
Council has been adamant this was the option the public chose, but back in May, Coun. Steve Neil said he felt this option was not one the public chose, but one it settled for.
Other councillors have expressed in previous meetings, the project should go ahead as it is.
However, time is running out on that funding, scheduled to expire in March 2026. It will still need to go through the tendering process.
It remains unclear whether the municipality could reapply.
Saint Andrews Chief Administrative Officer Chris Spear said many of the options would take too long and cost more money than the community can afford.
“This was kind of … what was, for the community, economically feasible while minimizing the effects on tourist season and for the most part people accepted that,” he said.
Council will meet on July 29 to discuss the project’s future.
