2017 – Initial Engineering Assessment

CBCL Engineering Report (2017):
- Identified serious structural deficiencies in the wharf: “cross-bracing failures, ballast box deterioration, wheel guard damage”.
- Urgent repairs estimated at $1.5 million, with a further $4 million in maintenance over 15 years.
- Report flagged “other challenges including sea level rise and king tides”.
- Recommendation: raise wharf approach by ~0.5 m to prepare for climate change.
- No infill or expansion proposed — focus was strictly repair and maintenance.

2018 – Early Public Concept

CBCL Public Open House (2018):
- First design sketches showed a potential raised approach and hinted at expanding Market Square.
- Residents expressed caution:
  - Concerns about altering tidal flow.
  - Emphasis on preserving “heritage look and feel” of waterfront.
  - Loss of boat launch was already raised as an issue.

2020 – Infill Berm Proposal and Council Pause

Aug 17, 2020 – Special Council Meeting:
- CAO Chris Spear presented “Market Wharf Design Concepts” (PW200801).
- Proposed infill berm: rock-armoured causeway replacing timber trestle, extending ~100 m, elevated against storms.
- CAO Spear described as a “forever solution” that will never have to be replaced again.”
- Acknowledged loss of boat ramp, offered staircase or ramp to beach.
- Benefits highlighted: storm resilience, sea-level rise protection, expanded Market Square.
- Council commentary:
  - Mayor Doug Naish: “Are we sure this drastic change is necessary?”
  - Councillor Guy Groulx: warned about tidal current changes and aesthetics: “The harbour’s character is at risk.”
  - Other councillors pressed for less drastic alternatives.
- Direction: Council instructed staff to pause, explore alternatives, and confirm with funding partners whether a modified plan would still qualify.
- Motion 298-08/20: Council unanimously voted to apply for ICIP federal-provincial funding, while keeping design options open.

2021 – Funding Approved, First Plan ($3.4M)

ICIP Funding Approved:
- Federal & provincial governments committed ~$5.5M, Town share ~$2.3M. Total ~$7.8M.
Initial 2021 Plan:
- Estimated at $3.4M.
- Publicly reported as rehabilitation/partial rebuild, not a full infill.
- Framed as a repair project, not expansion.
Council’s Position: Council accepted funding but recognized cost increases were likely. Staff tasked with keeping options open.

2022 – Scope Expands

Rising costs and “climate resiliency” goals caused staff and consultants to abandon the $3.4M plan.
Design scope shifted toward infill and expansion, justified by:
- Funding requirements (rehabilitation alone “would not qualify” for grants).
- Argument that infill would be a permanent solution with lower long-term costs.
First clear evidence of scope creep: from repair → expansion.

2023 – New Options & Public Input

Sept 6, 2023 – Special Council Meeting:
- CBCL Engineer Kori MacPherson presented five options:
  1. Rehabilitation (timber repair) – $5.37M.
  2. Infill Berm (causeway) – $6.06M.
  3. Precast Caissons – $7.88M.
  4. Steel Piles & Deck – $8.2M.
  5. Hybrid Infill + Piles – $7.82M.
- Council reactions:

- - Mayor Brad Henderson: argued rehabilitation would lose ICIP funding, so “not viable.”
  - Councillor Kurt Gumushel: pressed climate change justification.
  - Councillor (Chamcook rep): warned currents and aesthetics could be compromised.

- Outcome: Town leaned toward hybrid/infill options despite strong concerns.
- Feedback repeatedly emphasized:

- - Preserve tidal flow.
  - Protect aesthetics of heritage waterfront.
  - Concern about rushed funding-driven decision.

2024 – Regulatory Approvals Without EIA

May 6, 2024 – CBCL issued Environmental Permitting Drawings.
DELG Reviews (2021 & 2024):
- Ruled project did not require an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA).
- Justification: classified as “wharf repair/expansion under 10,000 m²”.

2025 – Intensified Opposition & Tender

May 2025 – Letters of opposition submitted:
- Cindy Kohler: “This project has evolved far beyond what was originally envisioned — a necessary repair. What we now face is a significant expansion with no clear long-term plan”.
- Concerns: shoreline erosion, aesthetics, property damage.
- Warning of potential legal action.
July 21, 2025 – Council Meeting (GEMTEC Study Presentation):
- GEMTEC study claimed:
  - Infill would have “minimal impact on flow patterns.”
  - “No obvious shoreline change is expected.”.
- Issues raised:
  - Study not stamped by a professional engineer.
  - Data conflicted with CBCL borehole findings (Gemtec: little sand; CBCL: mostly sand).
  - Public distrust heightened.
Public Feedback Report (July 2025):
- 72% opposed current plan.
- 88% wanted a pause.
- Quotes from residents:
  - “Preserve the peaceful shoreline character — that’s what makes St. Andrews special.”
  - “This feels like land-grab expansion, not repair.”
  - “Council is ignoring the will of the people.”.
July 31, 2025 – Minister Gilles LePage Response:
- Confirmed project is funded under Climate Change Fund/ICIP.
- Reiterated no EIA required.
- Acknowledged tidal concerns, but deferred to Town’s consultants.
August 2025 – Tender Documents Released:
- Scope:
  - Demolish timber trestle.
  - Build 4,545 m² infill revetment.
  - Armour stone, steel piles, concrete deck.
  - Install new utilities, asphalt surface, and electrical systems.
- Materials: ~43,000 tonnes of rock fill (~4,300 truckloads).
- Tender Closing: Sept 10, 2025. Completion target: May 2026.

Key Themes

Scope Creep: Repairs ($1.5M) → Rehabilitation ($3.4M) → Infill Expansion ($7.8M+).
Council Awareness: Repeated warnings by Naish, Groulx, and the public; overridden by funding pressures.
Public Opposition: Consistent majority against infill; surveys and petitions dismissed.
Regulatory Loophole: Project avoided EIA via bundling.
Shifting Justifications: Urgency → Cost savings → Climate resilience → Grant retention.
Transparency Issues: Residents allege misleading communications and inadequate consultation.

Market Wharf Historical Planning Timeline

Categories

Posts