{"id":7667,"date":"2020-12-16T07:57:33","date_gmt":"2020-12-16T11:57:33","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.chmafm.com\/welcome\/?p=7667"},"modified":"2020-12-16T17:25:45","modified_gmt":"2020-12-16T21:25:45","slug":"changes-to-allow-for-abattoir-pass-first-reading-at-town-council","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.chmafm.com\/welcome\/changes-to-allow-for-abattoir-pass-first-reading-at-town-council\/","title":{"rendered":"Changes to allow for abattoir pass first reading at town council"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/a>
Proposed abattoir building as seen from Fleet Street.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Sackville town council met Monday night and approved first reading of bylaw changes that would allow for a licensed abattoir to set up shop on Crescent Street in the town\u2019s industrial park, despite a considerable number of public objections.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Four councillors voted in favour of the bylaw changes: Councillors Shawn Mesheau, Bill Evans, Andrew Black, and Allison Butcher.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Two voted against: Councillors Mike Tower and Bruce Phinney.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

At a public hearing last month, two public objections were noted, but since then more have been received. A a total of 32 letters, all in objection to the proposal, were collected and distributed to council.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The majority of objections pointed to the Crescent Street location of the abattoir as the major concern, with the proximity to residential areas, the impact on the town\u2019s wastewater system, the potential for smell and other nuisances to impact quality of life, all mentioned.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Judith Weiss submitted a letter during the public hearing in November, saying, \u201cI fear that once the abattoir gets established it will not be possible to enforce the stated limits – it would be considered interfering with the growth of the business. Moreover, if demand increases, expansion will be justified as a way of satisfying local farmers.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

DELAYED SECOND READING, BUT NO DELAY FOR THIRD READING<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

After a motion by Councillor Shawn Mesheau, council agreed to postpone the second reading of the bylaw changes. While council was expected to consider both first and second readings of the changes on Monday, they will now consider second and third readings at their meeting in January.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

By combining second and third readings instead of first and second, the timeline for the potential project is unchanged, but councillors will have more time to gather further information in advance of the second reading.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

INDUSTRIAL VS AGRICULTURAL<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Before the vote on first reading, Councillor Mike Tower asked planner Lori Bickford about why the abattoir was being considered for the industrial park instead of on agricultural land.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Bickford said the impact and types of uses expected in the abattoir were more in line with an industrial area. She also said that in the definitions of the zoning bylaw, it stated that abbatoirs were not considered an agricultural use.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/a>
A Google map showing locations of most of the 27 licensed abattoirs in New Brunswick. To explore the map, click here<\/a>. <\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n

Tower pointed out that according to the provincial department of agriculture there are 27 provincially licensed abattoirs in the province. Tower says that of the 10 or 12 he looked up, all were located on agricultural land, and so he wondered why the current proposal was being looked at for Sackville\u2019s industrial zone.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Tower also commented that the communication around the project may not have been effective. \u201cI spoke to some of the people who have sent the letters in after our deadline, and some of them have no idea [about the project],\u201d said Tower.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Bickford said the notice was posted on the Sackville and Regional Service Commission websites, and letters were mailed to anyone living within 100 metres of the proposed site.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Tower said that because the industrial park is not a residential zone, there are very few people that might fall within the 100 metre boundary. \u201cOne way of looking at it is that industrial park pushes all the residents back, so that distance is almost false, and very few people could have known,\u201d said Tower.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Curiously, Tower is only partly right, in that Sackville\u2019s industrial park is actually bisected by a residential zone. The area around Charles Street and Beal Heights is a residential zone that stretches up to and even across Crescent Street, and is surrounded on each side by industrial zoning. But he\u2019s also right, in that the proposed location for Chris Pierce\u2019s abattoir is about 200 metres away from that residential zone.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/a>
Sackville industrial parking zoning map, from the Southeast Regional Service Commission website. A\/C stands for agricultural\/conservation, I for institutional, IND for industrial and R1 for urban residential.<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n

As for the odd zoning, Lori Bickford says that except for minor tweaking, the zone map here predates the 1990s, and she has no information on which came first, the residential or industrial zones.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

There is agricultural zoning nearby as well, to the north and south of the industrial park.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

THE ARGUMENT IN FAVOUR<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Councillor Bill Evans, with later support from Councillor Allison Butcher, spoke in favour of the proposed amendments that would allow for Chris Pierce to pursue his abattoir project, though he also acknowledged the legitimate concerns raised by the many letter writers in objection.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cWe’ve heard from a large number of people who’ve expressed objections to this proposal,\u201d said Evans. \u201cThese are all legitimate concerns and must be addressed satisfactorily.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But, said Evans, doing so by denying the proposed bylaw changes would be unfair to the applicant, and send the wrong signals to future potential developers about how the town operates.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cMight there be a way to address those concerns and approve the amendments?\u201d Evans asked. \u201cRather than viewing this as an either\/or choice between an abattoir or an attractive town?\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Evans argued that concerns about smell and environmental contamination would be satisfied because the abattoir will need to meet provincial standards in order to be licensed. \u201cWe will have in place a development agreement that requires that these conditions be met,\u201d he said. \u201cAnd if they are not, then the project will not go ahead.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Evans says his support for the proposed amendments is conditional, based \u201con assurances that our development agreement has been drafted so that neighbouring businesses and residents can be free from noxious smells and unreasonable noise, that neither the soil nor the water and sewage systems will be adversely affected, that the yucky stuff will happen indoors.\u201d And finally, if the development agreement is violated that the town will have the authority to enforce compliance, or as a last resort, deny the right of the abattoir to continue to operate.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

ONE ABATTOIR, THREE PLANNING\/BYLAW CHANGES<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Council voted first reading for three changes, with the first two amending the Municipal Plan and Zoning Bylaw to allow for an intensive resource zone within Sackville\u2019s existing industrial zone, which would allow an abattoir use under a development agreement.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The third change is the actual development agreement with farmer Chris Pierce, which would allow him to build and operate an abattoir at 72 Crescent Street.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Council will hear second and third readings of the proposed planning and by-law changes at its January meeting. The town has not posted its 2021 meeting dates yet, but typically council\u2019s regular meetings are on the second Monday of the month. That would mean the first meeting of 2021 will be on January 11.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

RELATED:<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n
Tonight at council: Decision on whether to allow planning process for abattoir<\/a><\/blockquote>