A Sackville resident is asking Tantramar council to change the way they regulate the size of dwellings in the former town.
Right now, Sackville dwellings must have minimum dimensions of 20 feet by 20 feet, which is too wide for buildings to be constructed offsite and transported on provincial highways to their final destination. Natalie Donaher is proposing using the equivalent in area, 400 square feet, for the minimum size requirement, thereby allowing for rectangular-shaped small homes that can be built elsewhere and transported to Sackville.
CHMA spoke to Donaher after Plan 360’s Jenna Stewart presented the idea to Tantramar council at their Monday meeting:
Donaher believes the change she’s proposing would be part of a municipal plan review when Tantramar takes one on, but the affordable housing advocate decided to apply for this change immediately, covering the $1500 application fee out of pocket. “I didn’t think we should wait that long,” says Donaher, “because it seems the housing crisis is much more urgent than that.”
“I’ve been speaking to and listening to stories in the last two, three months of instances of individuals who are having a difficult time finding housing here,” says Donaher. “Especially those with with animals or potentially small budgets for whatever reason. So this might fill that need, and I am hopeful that it goes through.”
Donaher says that the current bylaw limits people to hiring builders that can work on site, and precludes many skilled builders in the region. “This was to allow, hopefully, folks to find builders sooner,” says Donaher.
At their committee of the whole meeting on Monday, Tantramar council heard Plan 360 planner Jenna Stewart present Donaher’s proposed change. Stewart explained that the square dimensions requirement was likely an aesthetic choice by former councils to prohibit homes that looked like mobile homes, which are otherwise defined in the bylaw.
Councillor Michael Tower asked if the proposed change would allow for mobile homes in the R1 zone, but Stewart explained that mobile homes are otherwise defined in the plan, and actually have their own zone.
Councillor Bruce Phinney asked about examples of small footprint housing development in other municipalities, and Mayor Andrew Black cited the 12 Neighbours project in Fredericton as one example. 12 neighbours is a planned community of tiny homes created by Fredericton multi-millionaire Marcel LeBrun, designed to house and support the city’s growing unhoused population. The 99 tiny homes built by LeBrun and his charity are about 240 square feet in area, smaller than is permitted in Sackville, with or without Donaher’s amendment.
12 Neighbours “is an excellent transitional community example,” says Donaher, “but it is not what today’s amendment was aimed to reproduce.” Donaher avoids the term “tiny home” in favour of small footprint housing, or cottage style housing.
“I think 400 square feet, for the enthusiasts of tiny houses, they would say that’s not tiny anymore,” says Donaher. “So we’re just doing cottage-sized spots.”
Donaher says she will leave the discussion of whether 400 square feet is an appropriate minimum size for the review of Tantramar’s municipal plans which is expected to start next year.
The change from minimum dimensions to a minimum area for dwellings would apply to all zones, including R1 and R2 lots, but as Councillor Josh Goguen pointed on at Monday’s meeting, the change would not allow property owners in the R1 zone to add a small footprint home to a property with an existing home. That’s because Sackville’s R1 zone only allows for accessory dwelling units that are attached to the main dwelling unit on the property. So people with R1 lots can include a ‘granny suite’ or rental unit physically attached to their existing homes, but they can’t add a separate small footprint unit on their R1 property. In order for that to happen, council would need to make further changes to their zoning bylaw.
Tantramar council will decide whether or not to proceed with considering Donaher’s amendment at their meeting on November 12. After that, the change would go to the Southeast Planning and Advisory Committee and back to Tantramar council for a public hearing.
