A Manitoba resident is going to court in a bid to stop a controversial development project, alleging his rural municipality approved resolutions that contravene provincial legislation. Jason Sandilands has launched legal action against the Rural Municipality of St. Andrews, seeking an interim injunction to pause development of a 20.8-acre property. He is also asking the court to invalidate subdivision and variance resolutions passed by the municipal council. According to the lawsuit filed earlier this month, a Winnipeg-based planning and consulting firm made an application in March 2025 to subdivide the property next to River Road and behind Kelsey Trail into 76 lots. Planning documents received by the RM indicate the intent is to create a 38-duplex residential development along a new private gated road, equipped with a cul-de-sac. The filing claims the subdivision application was made to the Red River Planning District (RRPD), which provides planning and building development services to several jurisdictions north of Winnipeg. However, the suit alleges RRPD issued a report to the rural municipality’s council that concluded that the proposal was “not consistent” with the Planning Act—provincial legislation that establishes a framework for land planning, development, and zoning. That report also recommended the subdivision be rejected. “Among other concerns, each of the 76 proposed new lots has a site area and site width that is substantially less than the required minimum of 60,000 square feet (1.38 acres) and 198 feet, respectively,” reads the lawsuit. It claims council ultimately passed a subdivision resolution on May 13 and approved a variance application on Aug. 12 to reduce the minimum site area for the property, despite “hearing substantial opposition.” The filing argues the move fails to apply the mandatory criteria and requirements for subdivision and variance as set out in the Planning Act. Over 100 letters of opposition submitted to council A review of the RM’s meeting agendas reveals 15 letters of opposition were submitted in response to the subdivision application, with 88 letters of opposition to the variance application. “We don’t want and we don’t need high density housing in an established neighbourhood of homes on lots that meet the current size as stated in the current zoning by-law,” reads an opposition letter in part, submitted by Sandilands. The letter urged that the area’s “spacious lots and semi-rural charm” be preserved, noting that a petition opposing the subdivision had already collected over 650 signatures from residents. The lawsuit alleges that council’s decision to approve the subdivision and variance “lacks justification, transparency and intelligibility,” calling the approvals “untenable in light of the relevant factual and legal constraints” and “inconsistent” with both the evidence before council and the positions of affected parties. Neither the RM of St. Andrews nor Sandilands would comment, citing ongoing court proceedings. A GoFundMe organized by Sandilands for lawyer fees to oppose the development has raised over $10,000. CTV News has reached out to the RRPD, which is not named as a respondent in the lawsuit, for additional details but has not received a response. None of the claims have been tested in court, and the municipality has yet to respond through court filings.
