This is from the Friday Nov. 14 2025 Chronicle-Herald:
Eastern Passage housing developments a mistake in more ways than one, say neighbours
HRM looking at exceptions for waterfront developments after unintentional bylaw changes
Author of the article: Jen Taplin Published Nov 14, 2025
Eastern Passage residents are mobilizing to protest two waterfront developments they say are bigger than what’s allowed and are the result of a mistake made by HRM planners.
“It’s not rocket science: you don’t put high-density units in between single-family dwellings,” said Liana Tilley, who lives near the bigger of the two developments in question. “That’s not good city planning.”
The proposals are for a 64-unit building and a 22-unit building, both oceanfront on Main Road. They far exceed the 12-unit maximum for the area.
Neighbours say HRM staff made a mistake and tried to quietly fix it by pushing through bylaw amendments to allow the bigger builds but keep the 12-unit cap.
“If council is going to approve projects that contradict our planning laws, residents should expect a compelling, community-focused reason. In this case, there isn’t one,” reads their petition, which has over 500 signatures.
A numbered Nova Scotia company owns the smaller proposal at 1509 Main Rd, and the larger, four-storey building at 1407 Main Road is owned by Fall River-based Wombat Investments Inc., which purchased the property last year.
Eastern Passage resident Steve Taylor said that by speaking to people involved in the developments, he understands that HRM asked for proposals and told developers over a year ago that they could pretty much build whatever they want.
Sarah Brannen, HRM spokesperson, said in an email that isn’t the case.
“No, it is not correct that a request for proposals for development in this area was put out by the municipality,” she said. “There was a municipality-wide public engagement period held as part of the Urgent Changes to Planning Documents project (as part of the House Accelerator Fund Agreement with the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation) in which feedback and requests were received; however, this was not a request for proposals for development in this area.”
Brannen said that last May, council made urgent planning changes to enable housing and, at that time, removing the 12-unit cap was considered and included in public engagement activities.
“However, the attached legal text amendments implementing the approved changes also included removal of the 12-unit maximum, an option that had been discussed internally by staff but was not intended to be brought forward as part of a large package.”
So, basically, the 12-unit cap was unintentionally added to the amendment pile in May 2024 and corrected in another pile of housekeeping amendments in March.
Staff asked council approval to reinstate the 12-unit cap but, considering that these two development approvals had landed during that time, asked that they be given an exception, which includes the standard process of review, engagement and a council vote.
Tilley, who has lived in the area her entire life, is worried about the impact the four-storey building would have on her personally, as well as her community.
“It’s going to change my entire existence here,” she said.
“These bylaws are in place to protect the integrity, the essence of a coastal, seaside community, and that includes our shoreline and not having huge buildings that make us look like Miami north.”
Taylor pointed out that it doesn’t make sense to build so close to the water, where just down the road people are struggling with frequent flooding. He said it has a lot to do with the former Texaco refinery site, which used to divert water.
Tilley said the developments would hurt tourism, the coast and wildlife while adding strain to local infrastructure, including the already overworked sewage treatment plant.
“People moved here for a reason — they didn’t move here because there are going to be highrises and lots of units,” she said.
“I feel like I have to speak out about this because a lot of people, they won’t. I don’t care, I think it’s the right thing to do.”
HRM staff are in the review and engagement part of the process, which will result in a staff report for council and a public hearing.
Brannen said that if the change to zoning rules is approved by council, final approval for the buildings would be granted through the building permit process. She said it should be before council early in 2026.
She noted that this case is “not directly impacted” by the provincial rejection of the regional plan.
***
Link:
https://www.saltwire.com/nova-scotia/hal...terfront-bylaw-changes-building-planners
***
Chasing JT's sack of gold by jamming through changes to planning rules that allowed a lot of things that would never been allowed previously without taking the time to review the implications thereof now comes back to bite HRM Planning where it hurts. This is a prime example of both staff and Council incompetence and negligence.
If this is not fixed forthwith, many of the HRM Planning staff should be out of work due to incompetence, and Council should resign en masse or have their positions vacated by the Province.
Threaded Mode