A development agreement put in place twenty years ago is limiting development of the former Pizza Delight property on Mallard Drive, and so Tantramar council is being asked to take a step towards dissolving the agreement at its next regular meeting in May.
Lori Bickford of the Southeast Regional Service Commission’s Plan 360, was on hand at Monday’s Committee of the Whole meeting to present the proposal on behalf of the owner of the vacant property, numbered company 734163 NB Inc., owned by Rashid Tufail.
This is the second planning change sought by Tufail. In 2023, the owner sought changes to allow for drive-thru restaurants in the zone, something that the former town of Sackville had banned in 2001. Council approved of the change in September 2023.
The development agreement applies to two properties on Mallard Drive. Both the Home Hardware and Pizza Delight properties share a single development agreement created in 2004. But its the vacant Pizza Delight property that is limited by the current agreement.
“You’ll notice that the Pizza Delight building remains vacant at this time,” Bickford told council. “Under the agreement, the only use that would be permitted within that building would be a single restaurant.”
While other uses are permitted in the highway commercial zone, explained Bickford, the Pizza Delight property development agreement is much more restrictive, and can only be changed with a lengthy bylaw amendment process at town council.
At one point in time, development agreements, which are sort of like bespoke bylaws applying to particular properties, were required for all developments in Sackville’s highway commercial zone. But in 2008, Sackville town council lifted that requirement for new developments, allowing for as-of-right development in the zone. As-of-right development means property owners don’t need permission of council to develop, as long as their projects meet a list of specified uses and conditions.
“If Council does choose to remove the agreement, any new development or any change of use that would occur on either one of those properties would still be required to meet all requirements of the zoning bylaw,” said Bickford.
Councillor Bruce Phinney asked Bickford what types of uses would be possible on the site if the development agreement is dissolved. Bickford named the permitted uses listed under the town’s zoning bylaw for a highway commercial zone:
i) Automotive service station
ii) Automotive sales agencies and related activities
iii) Retail and service shops
iv) Places of amusement, assembly and recreation
v) Convenience store
vi) Restaurants
vii) Tourist accommodations and related facilities
vii) Shopping centre
viii) Existing residential
ix) Day care centres
Bickford confirmed that the property could not be used for residential development, as only existing residential is permitted in the zone.
If council chooses to go ahead with the process at their May meeting, the public will get a chance to weigh in on the question of whether or not to dissolve the current development agreement in a required public hearing. After that, council can make their final decision on the matter.
