After a public hearing that lasted nearly three hours, Fredericton city council put off voting Monday night on the rezoning needed for a controversial housing development in the city’s southwest corner.
Instead council asked staff for more information about the project proposed by Cedar Valley Investments for land abutting Golf Club Road and Prospect Street.
“I have a lot of questions,” Coun. Jason LeJeune said after council heard from more than a dozen people, most opposed to the proposal to build 870 homes on the former farmland.
“I need a lot more detail to contemplate. And I feel like I need more time.”
The planning advisory committee had been unanimously against the development, but city staff recommended council consider giving the rezoning first and second reading.
This past spring, Cedar Valley Investments purchased the 35-acre parcel of land for $6 million and has applied to have roughly two-thirds of it rezoned to allow buildings as tall as eight storeys. The development would also include single-family homes, including townhouses.
In addition to those who spoke Monday night, numerous letters and a petition were sent to the city in opposition. A handful were in support.
Louie Youssef, president of Cedar Valley Investments, did not attend the meeting but his wife and three experts on the project were there.
Dave McKay, the architectural lead, said low-rise townhouses, tree lines and parks will act as buffers to the new low-density housing and the existing residential neighbourhood.
He also spoke about the promotion of a healthy, active community through a multipurpose trail connecting the new development and surrounding neighbourhoods to a large park. He said access to services would be available through a commercial element of the plan along Prospect Street, for which specific vendors would not be confirmed until after construction.
According to the planning report from city planner Matthew Robinson, the developer has not provided any provision for supportive or affordable housing in the complex.
When asked about affordable housing during the meeting, McKay said that “the denser these developments, the cheaper it is to build and therefore … the cost can stay down.”
Residents from the area were skeptical and had concerns about increased traffic in a likely car-dependent development and insufficient infrastructure and services.
Lindsay Bowman, from the Golf Club Road neighbourhood, tried to appeal to the vision that councillors have for the city and that some expressed during their election campaigns.
“You spoke so eloquently about the opportunities that Fredericton has,” she told council. “And I don’t think this proposal is living up to your vision.
“This isn’t where any of you imagined putting 1,000 new citizens and families in Fredericton. … I’m going to be honest, it’s not a walkable community. We have no services. We have a church and we have a golf course in our neighborhood.”
Bowman said the community is a long uphill walk in either direction to get to services, adding that every new resident or family would need a vehicle since there’s no public transit.
She said that she isn’t confident that services will come if the development is built.
“I have unique knowledge as a business owner in Fredericton, that business owners aren’t willing to invest in infrastructure and overhead and this sort of thing on the hope that we can drive people to this community. The numbers won’t be there,” said Bowman.
“I think we’re giving a lot of deference to these hopes and prayers that this will all work out. And it hasn’t worked out in other neighbourhoods. And I don’t want to see it happen in mine.”
A resident of another Cedar Valley property and a Cedar Valley employee spoke in favour of the project.
- Controversial development gets nod from Fredericton city staff, but not planning committee
- Fredericton council approves 147-unit apartment building on street without buses or sidewalks
Following the presentations from the public, Coun. LeJeune moved that before third reading and the Oct. 23 meeting, the planning and development department provide an administrative report with more information about such things as public transit for the area, traffic mitigation and potential timelines for the public park amenities.
Coun. Bruce Grandy then moved an amendment that first and second readings, which were intended to happen Monday night, be deferred until Oct. 23 with third reading to take place at the following council meeting.
The amended motion was approved, and the administrative report will be available to the public on the Friday before the Oct. 23 meeting.
This story was originally published in CBC News on Sept. 12, 2023.
Hannah Rudderham Portfolio 