Lunenburg paused Blockhouse Hill. Now it needs a plan to restart it

On December 9, 2025, Lunenburg Council unanimously removed three Blockhouse Hill parcels from the Town's surplus-property list.

The staff report described the change as administrative. It said there were no current development plans and recommended removing the land until Council was ready to consider a specific project. The minutes record the motion and vote but not the discussion.

In the official meeting video, Mayor Jamie Myra said the decision did not mean there would never be development on the hill. He said the Town could not develop it at that time because the necessary infrastructure was not available.

The staff report says the land can be declared surplus again. Council did not set a timetable or say what would have to change first.

Waiting to sell until the Town knew whether the site could be serviced was reasonable. Leaving the land in limbo was not.

What Council paused

There was no approved Blockhouse development to cancel.

The Town hired MacKay-Lyons Sweetapple Architects to explore four concepts. Council selected the “Out of Sight” concept in April 2024 as a direction for more work. In July, it began a planning amendment that could have allowed development agreements with potential purchasers.

Those were meaningful steps. They were not a sale, a development agreement, a building permit, or a construction contract.

Important questions were still open: the exact land to retain, the number and type of homes, servicing costs, public access, archaeology, affordability, parking and traffic, construction timing, and long-term maintenance.

Pausing before those questions were answered was defensible. Ending the process without saying how they will be answered was not.

The earlier engineering found real constraints

The 2024 Blockhouse Hill Visioning Report includes a 14-page servicing review by DesignPoint Engineering. It examined water, wastewater, and stormwater for the three housing concepts. The work used a 2023 Town water-system assessment, a new hydrant test, modelling, and tests at the Back Harbour pumping station.

For the Out of Sight concept, the review found:

• The water system could provide normal domestic supply on the lower parts of the site. It could not provide the required fire flow without changes to the Town's transmission main, nearby water mains, building design, or some combination of them.
• The Back Harbour pumping station had no capacity for more development in its tested condition. Maintenance and sewer separation could allow 71 units. Relatively minor pump changes could raise that to 137. More than 137 units would require larger pumping-station or force-main upgrades.
• Most stormwater could be sent through a new outfall to the Back Harbour. The report did not expect major off-site stormwater upgrades, but it still required more drainage review and regulatory approvals.

The report also included servicing drawings and rough Class D cost estimates. It did not settle the final design.

DesignPoint recommended updating the Town's water model once the building types, street connections, and preferred concept were fixed. Its wastewater analysis stopped at the Back Harbour pumping station rather than assessing the rest of the downstream system.

The report treated electricity differently. Its cost estimate included allowances for underground power, communications, and a pole relocation, but it did not include an equivalent analysis of feeder or substation capacity.

Lunenburg's electrical system has real limits. The Town's approved 2026–31 electric capital plan calls for almost $21 million in work. It identifies overloaded winter conditions on two feeders and sets out a new Green Street substation, feeder conversion, and other upgrades.

The same plan says those upgrades will create capacity for new customers and larger loads. Once the feeder work is complete, available capacity is expected to double on some feeders and triple on others.

The 2024 servicing review gives Council a starting point. It also narrows the questions that remain:

• What electrical load could the site receive now and after the planned feeder and substation work?
• Which parts of the 2024 water, wastewater, and stormwater analysis are still current?
• Could a first phase stay within the 71- or 137-unit wastewater thresholds?
• Which upgrades are already in the capital plan, and when will they be complete?
• What portion serves the wider town, and what portion should a developer pay?
• Would a lease or phased agreement reduce public risk?

Before another land process, the Town should update the 2024 servicing work for a defined first phase and add a current Blockhouse-specific electrical connection analysis.

“Developer pays” is only part of the answer

Lunenburg's Street Services Extension Policy normally puts the cost of extending water, sewer, stormwater, and associated street infrastructure on the applicant. It also allows the Town to share costs where an extension has a clear public benefit, up to the lower of half the cost or $200,000.

The Town's January 2024 summary sheet said the Visioning Report's estimates assumed the developer would carry the utility-upgrade costs. That was a concept-stage cost assumption, not a negotiated agreement with a buyer.

That distinction makes sense. Pipes or roads built only for one project should not simply be handed to ratepayers. A larger feeder, main, or road improvement that serves existing residents and future projects is a different kind of investment.

A Blockhouse plan should separate:

• work inside the development;
• the connection from the site to the public system;
• town-wide upgrades already needed; and
• extra capacity built for later growth.

Then residents can see who pays, who benefits, and who carries the risk if costs rise.

Public land needs stronger terms than private land

Solving the infrastructure question would not settle every issue on Blockhouse Hill. The land is public and sits in the UNESCO buffer zone. The Visioning Report also documents public use of the open space and the site's archaeological potential.

New housing could help pay for better paths, access, and public space on Blockhouse Hill, but the Town needs to secure those benefits in the agreement.

Those facts call for a better deal, not an automatic refusal.

Before declaring the land surplus again, Council should publish the interests it intends to retain. Those could include public paths and viewpoints, a defined amount of permanent open space, archaeological work, construction limits, heritage review, infrastructure obligations, affordability terms, and deadlines to build.

The Town should also decide whether sale is the right tool. A long lease can preserve public ownership. Easements can protect access. Covenants and development agreements can control parts of the plan. Performance security and buyback rights can stop a purchaser from holding the land without delivering.

No single document will do all of this. The terms need to be designed before the Town asks residents to support another land process.

Give the pause an end date

Council should set a date for a Blockhouse Hill restart report. That report should:

1. update the 2024 water, wastewater, and stormwater findings;
2. add a Blockhouse-specific electrical load and connection analysis;
3. test whether a first phase can fit the available capacity;
4. state the land, access, heritage, affordability, and delivery terms the Town would require; and
5. recommend either a new housing process or a permanent public use for the land.

If development is technically or financially unrealistic, publish the evidence and make a durable decision about the land. If a phased project is possible after planned upgrades, start preparing for it now.

Lunenburg cannot say it needs housing, approve millions in utility work intended to create capacity, and leave one of its most studied public sites in limbo. The pause was reasonable. The absence of a plan to end it is not.