HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Atlantic Provinces


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #16621  
Old Posted Sep 8, 2025, 3:20 PM
Joe Joe is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 225
"Some form of involuntary institutionalization is necessary"

The same thing the Higgs government had proposed however there was so much opposition by the other parties as well as vocal citizen groups.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16622  
Old Posted Sep 8, 2025, 3:27 PM
cdnguys cdnguys is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,397
Quote:
Originally Posted by MonctonRad View Post


We cannot have revolving doors for habitual offenders. Some form of involuntary institutionalization is necessary. They don't get out until they have completed programs and have acquired skills. If this is not possible, then permanent institutionalization might not be a bad thing. We used to do it 50 years ago..........
What’s the current situation in Moncton for homeless / crime / tents?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16623  
Old Posted Sep 8, 2025, 4:42 PM
MonctonRad's Avatar
MonctonRad MonctonRad is online now
Wildcats Rule!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Moncton NB
Posts: 41,357
Quote:
Originally Posted by cdnguys View Post
What’s the current situation in Moncton for homeless / crime / tents?
No better than SJ. The encampments were always catching fire during the drought, placing citizenry in jeopardy. Lots of petty theft, usually committed by thieves on bicycles, multiple daily overdoses, panhandlers and vagrants galore (although they are doing a reasonable job of keeping them off Main Street).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16624  
Old Posted Sep 8, 2025, 5:21 PM
sailor734 sailor734 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2023
Posts: 2,683
Quote:
Originally Posted by MonctonRad View Post
No better than SJ. The encampments were always catching fire during the drought, placing citizenry in jeopardy. Lots of petty theft, usually committed by thieves on bicycles, multiple daily overdoses, panhandlers and vagrants galore (although they are doing a reasonable job of keeping them off Main Street).
At one point Moncton had more homeless than anywhere else in NB didn't it? Not sure that has changed any.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16625  
Old Posted Sep 8, 2025, 5:28 PM
MonctonRad's Avatar
MonctonRad MonctonRad is online now
Wildcats Rule!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Moncton NB
Posts: 41,357
Quote:
Originally Posted by sailor734 View Post
At one point Moncton had more homeless than anywhere else in NB didn't it? Not sure that has changed any.
I don't think it's any worse than before, possibly a little better (but this might only be because it is less visible).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16626  
Old Posted Sep 8, 2025, 6:20 PM
adamuptownsj adamuptownsj is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: Saint John NB
Posts: 2,053
This plan is deranged. Might even be worse than status quo. Homeless camps allowed on private land outside of red zones as long as the landowner doesn't personally object? What about neighbours? If I owned 6 acres in Drury Cove could I graciously set up a tent city? What about absentee landowners?

Nature Conservancy and and the Lantic Sugar site are 'yellow zones' which is horrendous. The latter will indeed remain an encampment site, per city council. There's been like four fires there this summer.

I have a feeling our brain trust at city hall are patting themselves on the back over this. The backlash will be massive.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16627  
Old Posted Sep 8, 2025, 7:17 PM
bingun bingun is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2024
Posts: 1,299
While it is going to have its challenges, this will, in theory, remove the highly visible encampments at Haymarket Square, Garden Street, Paradise Row, etc., which many citizens will be happy to see and will give them the impression that it is getting better.

The reality will probably be that the encampments are moved elsewhere to less visible spots, like Tin Can Beach. It will be interesting to see how long it takes the local homeless population to figure out where they can and cannot go, along with what the preferred locations are.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16628  
Old Posted Sep 8, 2025, 9:22 PM
sailor734 sailor734 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2023
Posts: 2,683
Quote:
Originally Posted by bingun View Post
While it is going to have its challenges, this will, in theory, remove the highly visible encampments at Haymarket Square, Garden Street, Paradise Row, etc., which many citizens will be happy to see and will give them the impression that it is getting better.

The reality will probably be that the encampments are moved elsewhere to less visible spots, like Tin Can Beach. It will be interesting to see how long it takes the local homeless population to figure out where they can and cannot go, along with what the preferred locations are.
I suspect this will only spread them out. I've seen what appear to be homeless people walking around the intersection of Millidge Ave and University this summer and a police officer acquaintance told me last year there was an encampment up behind the substation by Boar's Head Rd.

Yesterday there was a toll collector who looked to be in very bad shape (complete with the start of the fentanyl fold) at the entrance to the Superstore on Somerset. I'm not sure the Red Zones aren't just going to move the problems to a different area of town.

The situation is steadily getting worse and it is past time for the province to act decisively......something more than platitudes and rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic

Last edited by sailor734; Sep 8, 2025 at 9:41 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16629  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2025, 12:06 AM
paperplane paperplane is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2025
Posts: 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by adamuptownsj View Post

Nature Conservancy and and the Lantic Sugar site are 'yellow zones' which is horrendous. The latter will indeed remain an encampment site, per city council. There's been like four fires there this summer.
I can't see how Tin Can Beach won't just turn into the designated encampment location, concentrating much of everything there...

And how can Nature Conservancy land be deemed yellow if the Nature Conservancy owns that land?

It's going to be interesting how things go after tonight's Council Meeting.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16630  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2025, 12:19 AM
sailor734 sailor734 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2023
Posts: 2,683
Quote:
Originally Posted by paperplane View Post
I can't see how Tin Can Beach won't just turn into the designated encampment location, concentrating much of everything there...

And how can Nature Conservancy land be deemed yellow if the Nature Conservancy owns that land?

It's going to be interesting how things go after tonight's Council Meeting.
I was wondering that too.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16631  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2025, 12:30 AM
bingun bingun is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2024
Posts: 1,299
Maybe I didn't read it correctly, but my interpretation was that private property owners had to consent and that without that consent, the yellow zones are not kosher. Now, how much assistance the city would offer to remove or relocate a non-consensual yellow zone is another story. I doubt they'll let them use the conservatory lands for an extended period, if at all.

However, I agree that the issue is going to be absentee landowners, especially with vacant property.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16632  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2025, 9:33 AM
sailor734 sailor734 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2023
Posts: 2,683
Council passed the red zone strategy 9-1 last night with Greg Norton being the only nay vote. He was critical of the plan saying it didn't go far enough and just moved the problem to other parts of the city.

https://tj.news/saint-john-south/council...votes-to-pass-red-zones?itm_source=index

From the article............."The lone opposition vote came from a councillor who submitted his own, more prescriptive motion on the unhoused issue that has bedeviled the port city for more than two years.

Ward 1 Coun. Greg Nortion is calling for the “abatement” of current homeless encampments and the setting out of emergency powers related to any future encampments. If enacted, the motion would demand the removal of tents within a “defined 14-day period, activate coordinated enforcement tools for private lands and request parallel action by provincial and federal authorities on their lands as well.”

His plan calls for collaboration among numerous municipal institutions, including by-law enforcement officers, the police force, the public works department, and legal services to remove all encampments from city-owned or city-managed lands within 14 days of the motion passing."

I guess I question the whole idea of yellow zones. If the city gives people the option of several green zones why not have 100% of the rest of the city red by default? Otherwise I expect the encampments will just pop up elsewhere.

I'll also be interested to see the degree of enforcement. You can set up all the red zones you want but without prompt and effective enforcement these regulations mean nothing.

Last edited by sailor734; Sep 9, 2025 at 10:48 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16633  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2025, 2:43 PM
adamuptownsj adamuptownsj is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: Saint John NB
Posts: 2,053
Quote:
Originally Posted by bingun View Post
Maybe I didn't read it correctly, but my interpretation was that private property owners had to consent and that without that consent, the yellow zones are not kosher. Now, how much assistance the city would offer to remove or relocate a non-consensual yellow zone is another story. I doubt they'll let them use the conservatory lands for an extended period, if at all.

However, I agree that the issue is going to be absentee landowners, especially with vacant property.
Backwards, actually. Tents are allowed to go up on private 'yellow' property until the owner wants them removed/cause a series of disturbances. In all cases, the owner is responsible for cleaning up after.

I doubt the NCC or NTNB have the resources to police their land regularly, so the city should consider these sites de facto parkland, which would move them to 'red'.

Also, the Spruce Lake and Loch Lomond reservoirs are somehow yellow! What the hell?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16634  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2025, 2:57 PM
sailor734 sailor734 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2023
Posts: 2,683
Quote:
Originally Posted by adamuptownsj View Post
Backwards, actually. Tents are allowed to go up on private 'yellow' property until the owner wants them removed/cause a series of disturbances. In all cases, the owner is responsible for cleaning up after.

I doubt the NCC or NTNB have the resources to police their land regularly, so the city should consider these sites de facto parkland, which would move them to 'red'.

Also, the Spruce Lake and Loch Lomond reservoirs are somehow yellow! What the hell?
Because a homeless encampment is just what you want on the shores of your water supply.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16635  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2025, 4:11 PM
bingun bingun is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2024
Posts: 1,299
This is a quote from the FAQ. I think what they are trying to do is say that if any city or government-owned land is yellow, you will be allowed to camp there, with certain restrictions. It will be interesting to see what those locations are.

I really hope they aren't lax on the private property piece, though, as you are right that many organizations don't have the resources and putting clean-up costs on them is harsh. We might see more sites put up fencing like we have seen in a few uptown areas.

Quote:
Q: What is a Yellow Zone?
A: Yellow Zones are areas of the city that are not Red or Green Zones. Individuals may set up tents on private properties in Yellow Zones with the consent of the property owner. The City has many vacant properties all throughout Yellow Zones that will be available for people to tent at if they have no other housing solution. Outreach teams will ensure that individuals experiencing homelessness are aware of the locations of Red and Yellow Zones.


Q: Why are Yellow Zones needed?
A: Yellow Zones are a temporary emergency response to the housing crisis. They are not a permanent solution. They will be phased out as more housing and institutional supports are provided by the Province.


Q: Are there rules or criteria for Yellow Zones?
A: Yes, there are minimum standards for Yellow Zones, including:

A minimum of 3 meters between tents.
No more than 5 tents can be in a cluster.
A minimum of 50 meters between clusters.
Sites must be kept clean and orderly.
Structures that pose a fire hazard, such as temporary wooden structures are not permitted.

Q: If my property is considered a Yellow Zone, does this mean that people can tent in my yard?
A: No. Individuals experiencing homelessness can only tent on a private property in a Yellow Zone if they have the permission of the landowner.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16636  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2025, 4:55 PM
adamuptownsj adamuptownsj is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: Saint John NB
Posts: 2,053
They said there were 7 city owned yellow zones and 1 provincial. Where these are remains, apparently, a secret to all.

They were also very clear during the meeting that permission is assumed from private landowners as the default. The deputy mayor brought up a small piece of vacant land, owned by who knows who-- across the street from his suburban house (IIRC in Millidgeville) where people walk their dogs, etc-- that is not an official park, or even city-owned. City staff affirmed that camps will be OK there, until the landowner objects, or substantial crime and filth accumulate and the police have to get involved.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16637  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2025, 6:35 PM
EnvisionSaintJohn's Avatar
EnvisionSaintJohn EnvisionSaintJohn is offline
New Brunswick, Canada ⛵️
 
Join Date: Apr 2023
Location: Canada's first City 🍁🌊
Posts: 4,095
Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by adamuptownsj View Post
This plan is deranged. Might even be worse than status quo. Homeless camps allowed on private land outside of red zones as long as the landowner doesn't personally object? What about neighbours? If I owned 6 acres in Drury Cove could I graciously set up a tent city? What about absentee landowners?

Nature Conservancy and and the Lantic Sugar site are 'yellow zones' which is horrendous. The latter will indeed remain an encampment site, per city council. There's been like four fires there this summer.

I have a feeling our brain trust at city hall are patting themselves on the back over this. The backlash will be massive.
Do you, because I guess you could... if you do! I also wonder, would you be able to charge a "camping" fee? Or would the police actually respond to calls to evict encampments without permission on large, vacant private properties in the middle of the vast wilderness found within the Saint John city limits?

It will be interesting if temporary encampments do end up popping up out that way in Drury Cove, especially that large 100 acre parcel that is directly on the border with Rothesay's Kennebecasis Park.

Maybe such a "development" would actually help get some major projects green lit, funded and built, across the entire Saint John region, and not just within the city of Saint John.

The residents of the outlying KV suburbs certainly do have an outsized political influence compared to us lowly Saint Johners, so if encampments did start popping up in the yellow zones within the Saint John city limits, in Rothesay's "backyard", it could actually lead to sustainable solutions to homelessness and affordable housing being funded and built quicker, across the region.

I've heard many times that homeless people that try and live throughout the outlying Kennebecasis Valley suburbs eventually get "dropped off" at the Saint John city limits. Maybe it's time for Saint John to start doing the same thing and start dropping them off near the city limits to temporarily camp out in the woods on Rothesay's doorstep?




Really though, in the long term, I hope this large, 100+ acre parcel of vacant land is made available for development.

However, in the short term, I think it would be very difficult for the city to police and disband encampments on vacant private properties like this and many other vacant properties that are found all around the city of Saint John. The more problematic people that chose to relocate "into the woods" and away from the city centre and residential neighbourhoods, the better.

It doesn't seem Rothesay, Quispamsis, Grand Bay and Hampton want to pay their fair share towards solutions within the city of Saint John or within their own communities to address homelessness epidemic and shortage of affordable housing which are regional problems. There's lots of people from KV who become homeless in Saint John... and it's our city that deals with the worst parts of this regional issue. We need to found much more ambitious solutions for deeply affordable housing, along with addressing things like mental health, addictions, violent offenders, and providing shelter space and transitional housing where it's needed the most.

Housing NB and the provincial government should be funding a massive push for affordable housing, including publicly owned projects that are built by private companies, and privately developed projects that are subsidized by public funding from all three levels of government, including subsidy in the form of 10+ year tax holidays from the city for any building built over 10 stories with a majority of affordable housing, with a tax holiday of up to 20 years for buildings that reach up to 40 storeys or above with .333 years of tax holiday added for every floor above 10 storeys up to a ceiling of 40 storeys or 20 years maximum.

Obviously, the province would beed to step in and pay for infrastructure upgrades, but Saint John has room for dozens and dozens of high rises developments popping up all over the city from the Uptown Core, to the West Side, to Millidgeville and Drury Cove, to East Point, Red Head, and beyond. If Saint John could truly work out a fair deal for industrial property tax reform, along with a fair deal from the outlying suburbs, and support from the province, Saint John could see its own type of "Little Brooklyn" projects become possible, and high rise developments could be the key to retaking the #1 spot back from Moncton... not just as a city, but as a CMA.



Look what Halifax has made possible with regional amalgamation, a growing port, and a more than fair tax situation with the province and its outer suburbs.


If the government of NB decided to make a targeted, massive investment in Saint John, its first city, its most deprived city, and modelled the new municpal model on the Halifax model as a single, regional municipality, it would become the largest municipality in NB again overnight, and the province could support it to once again become the largest CMA again. Followed by a similar investment plan for Moncton, but clearly, the money is better spent in Saint John right now, since the Moncton economy doesn't need the stimulus and infrastructure spending nearly as bad as Saint John needs it. Saint John's got wooden pipes for petes sake, and some of the oldest, most decrepit infrastructure of any city in Canada.

Saint John and its regional leaders and provincial partners should be doing everything they can to make sure Saint John has a path to surpass Halifax as Canada's largest container port on the Atlantic Ocean. Our Port CEO has said previously, one Port Saint John's biggest limiting factors is the relatively small population size of the Saint John CMA, so clearly, Saint John needs to grow its population as much as possible to sustain this rapid growth at the port. On the other hand, Saint John has a really good location for the the entry port model, which built the economies of Hong Kong and Singapore. Obviously, Saint John isn't going to be the next Hong Kong or Singapore, , but it does have enormous potential to take advantage of the unique geographical and geopolitical location of its port as a hub to an entire continent of commerce.

The port could get the CMA to 400k and beyond one day, especially if all three levels of government are willing to step up and embrace a big, bold vision for Canada's oldest city. All it will take is a premier and a PM with vision and an ambitious plan to make it possible. Carney is the right type of premier to make it happen, but is Susan Holt the right type of premier? If Carney wins another election, and does Holt, maybe Wayne Long isthe mayor we will need to tenaciously pursue federal and provincial funding to realize a more ambitious future for this city?

Last edited by EnvisionSaintJohn; Sep 10, 2025 at 7:50 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16638  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2025, 6:37 PM
bridgeoftea's Avatar
bridgeoftea bridgeoftea is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2021
Posts: 701
Quote:
Originally Posted by adamuptownsj View Post
They said there were 7 city owned yellow zones and 1 provincial. Where these are remains, apparently, a secret to all.

They were also very clear during the meeting that permission is assumed from private landowners as the default. The deputy mayor brought up a small piece of vacant land, owned by who knows who-- across the street from his suburban house (IIRC in Millidgeville) where people walk their dogs, etc-- that is not an official park, or even city-owned. City staff affirmed that camps will be OK there, until the landowner objects, or substantial crime and filth accumulate and the police have to get involved.
So what happens when every private owned land tells them to buzz off? I'm sure it'll be a huge fight to get people to move. Drove by the group on the hill by the Irving on the hall and saw a guy with a bunch of 2x4s and a saw cutting up planks for his spot.

Guess he should take his receipt back to Kents for the wood he bought as that's not allowed now.

Must be the same for those by the funeral home Milledge ave that have what appears to be 2 stories built up.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16639  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2025, 6:45 PM
MonctonRad's Avatar
MonctonRad MonctonRad is online now
Wildcats Rule!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Moncton NB
Posts: 41,357
For encampments set up on private land with absentee ownership, eventually squatter's rights might come into play:

Quote:
Squatters' rights, also known as adverse possession, allow someone to gain legal ownership of property through long-term, open, notorious, continuous, and exclusive use without the owner's permission. The required time period varies, but in New Brunswick, it is generally 20 years for private land and 60 years for Crown land.
So, is the city of Saint John now condoning squatter's rights? Is any attempt being made to contact the absentee owners that their land is being occupied???
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16640  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2025, 7:04 PM
gtsoc gtsoc is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by bridgeoftea View Post
So what happens when every private owned land tells them to buzz off? I'm sure it'll be a huge fight to get people to move.
I have a large patch of land behind my house that is deemed 'yellow'. I also have an extra long hose. Problem solved.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Atlantic Provinces
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 9:09 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.