Meeting held August 13, 2024
Pride in the Woods seeks support
Ryon Jackson and Jason Maclennan, organizers of the Pride in the Woods Festival held at Fox Haven, a private tourist outfitter in Lavigne, asked council to support their event, set for August and now in its third year. The duo were seeking support in principle in hopes of eventually obtaining letters from the town in support of future funding applications to higher levels of government. They characterized Pride in the Woods as a family-friendly event, open to all, that promotes inclusivity in a safe and private setting.
They also stressed that the event brings tourism and benefits local businesses, and that campgrounds in Tweed and Orangeville have expressed interest in hosting but they would like to keep the festival in West Nipissing. Jackson said that “without municipal support we don’t qualify for grants and we end up having trouble funding the festival,” adding that with “the former mayor’s letter of support we got a grant” for the first edition of Pride in the Woods.
Some council members expressed concern about the town being associated with other events hosted at the venue, operated by Jackson. “I just don’t believe your additional events like Toddler Fest (…) necessarily reflect the family values that the municipality has,” said councillor Kaitlynn Nicol, adding she did not support the request “because it could be misconstrued that the municipality is endorsing these other events as well and I just personally don’t find that appropriate.”
Maclennan argued that they were not representing Fox Haven as the venue, only the Pride in the Woods event. “We are not Fox Haven (…), we are renting the space,” he specified, comparing it to a movie theatre where you might bring your kids to see a Disney movie even though the same theatre may present R-rated movies at other times.
Councillor Georges Pharand echoed Nicol’s concerns, adding “I see it as a private event and private campground and I wish you all the best with it but I wouldn’t want us to support it.” He added that the town already supports West Nipissing Pride, which “does an excellent job, they put on a really good festival.” When asked if the organizers are collaborating with West Nipissing Pride, Jackson said they had reached out but not heard back yet.
Mayor Kathleen Thorne Rochon pointed out that there was no formal request for a letter, so council had nothing to vote on at the moment. The delegation was told that they would have to return and make a specific request when they do apply for funding, at which time council would vote on whether or not to provide a letter of support for the specific application.
Petition for one-way streets downtown
A request was brought by Tracy Renaud, a small business owner who operates a chiropractic clinic on Main Street, for council to consider making Main and King streets in downtown Sturgeon Falls accessible only to one-way traffic. The request was supported by a petition signed by 112 people, including several downtown business owners and staff.
Renaud expressed “frustration related to traffic flow and parking in the downtown core,” writing that “there is limited parking for customers and employees and the issues with trying to turn onto these streets is horrifying to watch.” She added that four way stops recently added at every intersection during construction are not helping the situation.
In her opinion, one-way streets would improve visibility when turning or crossing the street, facilitate maintenance and plowing, and eliminate the need for parallel parking as it would allow for angled parking. She added that it would provide better visibility for downtown businesses as people would have to travel along both streets to get off or onto Front.
Renaud asked the town to do a traffic study to evaluate this option or others to improve traffic flow. Council asked administrative staff to study the issue and come back with a report and recommendations for future discussion.
Surplus land between Riverfront and Demers
Council received a report regarding municipal lands located between Riverfront Drive and Demers Street, with a recommendation that the land be declared as surplus so that staff can obtain an appraisal and eventually sell it by public tender on an “as is – where is” basis, with a reserve bid.
According to the staff report, the property is the remainder of a large tract of land which was owned by the Town of Sturgeon Falls. In 1995, the town surveyed and sold 30 lots on Riverfront Drive followed in the early 2000’s by a sale to a local developer who subdivided the lands now known as Demers Street. The interior land between Riverfront and Demers was intended to be sold to that same developer for another phase of residential development, however the transaction did not take place and the lands remain vacant.
A prior council had indicated that the lands should be held for expansion of the non-profit housing corporation, however the WN non-profit housing corporation has no expansion plans for that area of the municipality, it was noted.
On three occasions, the town sold individual lots to homeowners on Riverfront to extend their properties, but staff worried that this piecemeal approach would devalue the overall property and potential for development. Councillor Roch St-Louis said residents had approached him about the possibility of buying individual lots and were told the town would not be selling, despite the precedent. “If we’ve already approved three then why not more right, so there’s a lot of inquiries on it,” he stated.
“You know we’re devaluing the land when we sell pieces and then leave ourselves with pieces that are undevelopable and when we’re in such a desperate need for housing that is fully serviced and centrally located,” stated the mayor, estimating that there would be a potential of about 40 building lots at approximately $55,000 apiece or more.
Councillor Jamie Restoule agreed, saying “I wouldn’t be supportive of continuing the checkerboard that we’re doing with the small lot additions between or behind homes. We’re all aware of the value of land and the shrinking opportunities with the core of Sturgeon Falls (…) to develop housing lots.” He added that it was important to get maximum dollar from any eventual sale, to benefit taxpayers.
Councillor St-Louis added that a developer would also address drainage issues in the area, which would benefit current residents of that neighbourhood.
Councillor Kris Rivard had a different take, saying that the area might better serve as a park or green space to enhance the residential neighbourhood, perhaps with trails. Town planner Melanie Ducharme responded that “it’s fairly swampy back there” and that, to her knowledge, the space is “not used for any recreation purposes.”
The mayor stressed that they could incorporate “conditions as far as timelines for development” to deter speculators who might buy and sit on the property for many years without developing it. She asked for a show of hands to see if the majority was willing to get the ball rolling on an evaluation so that the matter could then be considered more fully. “This is not a done deal, it’s a step number one,” she concluded as the majority expressed agreement.
Scouts Island
May 21, council declared surplus the land known as Scouts Island. A valuation was obtained, putting the value between $175 and $200K. Staff sought direction from council to proceed with a tender to sell the land, but wanted to know if they should include or exclude a portion of the property currently being used by the Villa Aubin for parking. “Council may wish to retain the entrance to the property fronting on Cache Bay Road as well as the portion being used for parking and grant a registered right of way to the Island which would run with the lands in perpetuity,” they suggested.
Council wanted to know if the parking was indeed benefiting the residents of Villa Aubin, before making a decision. Staff was asked to make this inquiry and return with more information for the next meeting on September 3.
Backyard chickens get green light, with regulations
After extensive discussion at the July council meeting about allowing and regulating backyard chickens in urban residential areas, staff studied 12 bylaws from comparable municipalities (Arnprior, Billings, Burk’s Falls, Clearview, Kawartha Lakes, Parry Sound, Perry, Powassan, Rideau Lakes, Saugeen Shores, South River, Springwater) and brought back a report.
Chickens remain permitted in the Agricultural (A1 and A2) and Rural zones, with council looking to expand this to include Urban Residential zones, a matter under discussion since July 2023.
In April 2024, an online survey of urban residents elicited 442 responses over two weeks. Advantages cited were education and food security. Concerns expressed included potential for disease spread such as avian flu, E. coli and salmonella; attracting predators and pests; nuisance to neighbours (odour) among others. A staff report noted that 79% of respondents supported chickens on urban residential properties; 92% supported chickens on rural residential properties; and 77% supported chickens on waterfront/shoreline residential properties. “Majority of the comments were in support of introducing backyard chickens, provided that there were regulations in place to address their concerns,” the report specified.
Staff countered the food security argument by pointing out that keeping hens is a costly endeavour, citing figures from Small Flock Ontario showing that “the setup of a backyard coop would be approximately $1,100 (not including permit and licensing fees), and the annual costs would be around $900.” According to the staff report, “food security challenges are caused by income disparity and it is unlikely that the keeping of hens would be financially feasible to those that are struggling with food insecurity.”
Staff also pointed out that “introducing chickens to urban residential areas will impact staff” who would have to oversee licensing administration, review applications, conduct on-site inspections and so on. “Staff anticipate an increase in complaints regarding noise, smell, and animals at large. Depending on the number of licenses requested, additional resources, both human and educational, are likely to be required,” reads the report, suggesting that a permit or license fee could help recoup some of these enforcement costs.
Councillor Dan Gagné, chair of the Planning Committee, asked council to consider the options for registration requirements and fees, inspections, lot size limits and number of chickens allowed as well as other outstanding decisions to come up with a final by-law on urban backyard chickens.
Registration required but no fee
Councillors Rivard and Nicol supported having no registration requirement and therefore no fees, saying that it would be sufficient to post the bylaw online. Councillor Pharand suggested a one-time registration, with no fee, because “if there was an outbreak of avian flu or some disease that’s transmitted through chickens and the government ordered a cull, we would need to know who has chickens and to make sure that they abide by the law.”
Councillor Restoule agreed, saying it would be “good practice to do at least one time registration,” even with no fee, as “good data is always good to have” for public safety. Councillor St-Louis added that when people register, “we’d be able to provide them with all the information that they require” to be responsible chicken owners.
Councillor Pellerin cautioned that council needed to “keep it simple,” as costs were already high so few people would have coops if there were a registration fee. In the end, the majority voted in favour of registration but with no fee attached.
Council also set no cap on registrations or the number of coops allowed in the municipality.
Property size and number of chickens
Everyone agreed that chickens be allowed on shoreline and rural residential lots over one acre, and eventually settled on a limit of 10 chickens on these properties.
Staff reported that other municipalities allowed between 4 and 10 chickens, or an average of 5 per lot, urban and rural combined.
“I say no limit because it’s dependent on the size of the family,” opined Nicol. Pharand noted that some rural lots could be as big as 50 acres, suggesting limits could be tied to the size of the lot. However staff specified that lots over 10 acres would already be zoned RU and allowed to raise fowl even commercially. Pharand then agreed with the majority on the limit of ten.
The same limit was set for urban residential lots over 1 acre, which are rare but do exist in some areas.
When it came to smaller residential lots, opinions varied. Clerk Melanie Ducharme noted that 90% of lots in Sturgeon Falls and Verner are 66’ x 132’, or 0.2 acre. Pellerin wanted to allow coops on any urban lot, big or small, saying “you can have a dog anywhere and I’d rather have a chicken as a neighbour than a barking dog.” Restoule responded that “downtown we do have an issue with dog waste” and that this was a potential risk with chickens as well.
Rivard was more reserved. “I’d like to see chickens allowed in these areas as well, just with a smaller number,” he said, suggesting a limit of six. Pharand chimed in that four chickens would feed a family of four, recommending a limit of 5.
St-Louis, Thorne Rochon and Restoule all favoured a limit of four chickens on urban lots, which was ultimately agreed upon.
Gagné said he would side with the majority, but he did have reservations. “I don’t favour having chickens in urban areas. I live in town and I don’t want to have chickens, whether they make a bit of noise or not (…) If I’d like to have a chicken farm (…) well there’s farming lands available to actually do that” he opined, but added he would support the majority decision.
All agreed there would be no chickens allowed on lots smaller than .2 acre and no roosters on any residential property, rural or urban. The majority decided there would be no coops on multi-residential properties, no matter the size.
No slaughtering or egg sales
Five members voted against allowing backyard slaughtering of chickens, following staff recommendations. Rivard countered that he had seen “neighbours skinning moose or deer in their garage” and wondered how this would be different. Staff stressed that slaughtering was allowed on farmland in the area. Restoule wondered what the public health implications could be in having animals slaughtered in urban areas, and wanted this practice not permitted.
The majority also voted against allowing residential coop owners to sell eggs, though Nicol felt this regulation unnecessary, saying that the chicken limit would mean “they probably won’t have enough eggs anyway.”
Inspections not required
When it came to inspections, only Councillor Restoule spoke in favour, saying “it might be simpler if we just had a quick inspection to make sure” requirements are met, rather than go back and get people to fix a problem identified afterward. He came back to the topic of fees, adding “there might be some value in putting a small something that’s at least cost recovery for our inspectors to go check (…)”.
That discussion was shut down as council had already voted on fees. Mayor Thorne Rochon said that inspections would be too onerous with no fees charged for registration. “There’s a cost to that,” she said of onsite inspections. “We are understaffed (…) already (…) and we do have to account for the cost of our staff time.”
More to discuss
While the bylaw is much closer to becoming complete, some outstanding items are still to be discussed, such as requirements on the size of coops and runs, an education package, setbacks and so on. Staff will return with information and recommendations on these, before a final bylaw can be drafted and eventually adopted.
Brown water in Verner
Councillor Fern Pellerin added to the agenda a discussion on the water in Verner, which continues to come out brownish at some homes. “Many residents are asking for [an] update on the situation with the water in Verner. What is the plan,” he asked.
Elizabeth Henning, Engineer and Director of Infrastructure, provided an update.
She explained that they were using potassium permanganate to remove manganese, which was causing the discolouration. The municipality has increased flushing of lines from twice per year to monthly at the water plant hydrant for Cartier and Principale streets, which were known problematic locations, she added. The town has also been doing thrice weekly sampling at 6 homes that were frequent reporters of discoloured water. “As of now the testing has not resulted in any cases of discoloured water. It should be noted that over the past 5 years, service requests regarding discoloured water have been received from less than 5% of users,” Henning noted.
“Our findings are that when discoloured water occurs, it clears when the tap is run for one minute. This indicates that the problem is not with the municipal water system but that there is likely build up in the resident’s hot water tank or plumbing. This is a common occurrence in older homes and is often more noticeable when residents have been away and water is left sitting over time in pipes. Our recommendation to residents experiencing this would be to run the water until it clears, and/or to consider having their hot water tank flushed,” Henning advised.
The town is working on mid and long-term solutions, she assured. This includes $470,000 this year for water tower tank replacement and pedestal repairs, $1.5 million for construction of a new water tower tank next year, the beginning of geotechnical investigation for the feeder main from Cache Bay to Verner in 2025 and continued negotiations with CPR to install a feeder main on the CPR corridor, to eventually supply water from Sturgeon Falls.
Of course, financing remains a roadblock, as construction of the feeder main from Cache Bay to Verner is expected to cost upwards of $10 million. “The municipality continues to watch for grant opportunities to bring this project forward. Staff is continuing to examine long term solutions to these issues,” Henning concluded.
Pharand was first to react to the report. “I was surprised to read in your report that (…) the problem is not with the municipal water system and that (…) it might be older homes, old pipes (…) This is inconsistent with what I’ve read in the (…) AECOM report in 2021 so (…) what is it? Is it a problem with manganese or is it a problem with people’s homes,” he wanted to know.
He stressed that the problem has been ongoing “on and off for many years” and wanted it clarified that it was still being treated as a problem with the municipal water system and not being passed off on homeowners to rectify themselves, a concern he said many residents had expressed to him.
Municipal treasurer Alisa Craddock acknowledged the manganese problem in the source water but said this was now being treated and the water was “not a problem when it leaves our plant”. She said the town started swabbing the lines last summer, which rectified a problematic section. “This year (…) we’re testing the lines in the house, we’re testing right outside the house, we’re testing at our plant, and the water problem does not exist within the treated water,” she stressed.
Councillor Pellerin said he had “spent a lot of time with Mr. Ming”, manager of Water and Wastewater, to understand the issues. He explained that manganese settles, and with a burst of pressure it can mix into the water and turn it brown. “It’s been a lot better in the last month, month and a half (…) the water is a lot clearer but it is still happening.” He said he got two calls that day with photos, one of a ruined sweater that had just been washed and one of brown water in a bathtub after running the tap more than one minute as recommended. “It is still in the system.”
Henning stated this could be the result of hot water sitting in a hot water tank, saying “hot water does bring out the colour.”
Pellerin said many people call him but do not report the issue to the town, though he has urged them to make a complaint. Pharand had an opinion as to why, saying “there are a lot of people who don’t complain and I think a lot of it is because they feel despair that nothing is being done about it (..,) so why bother complaining (…).” Henning responded that since 2018, 16 homes (out of 329 users in Verner) have complained of discoloured water, though there are fewer complaints since the swabbing and extra flushing began. Short term solutions are already in place, she reiterated.
Rivard summed up the issue. “The root of this problem is the source water has high levels of manganese”, he said, adding that this is the overlying cause “that we have to tackle (…) , look at ways to move this up the ladder to try and get this resolved as soon as possible. I think drinking water, esthetically pleasing to the eye water as well, is a very important thing that people should have here.” He also objected to the approach of leaving residents on the hook. “Just to be kind of telling residents that they should be doing this at their own cost (…), that doesn’t sit well with me.”
To that, Pharand suggested perhaps installing a filtration system at the 16 to 20 homes affected as a temporary measure. Craddock insisted that the water was clear at the end of the municipal line so responsibility is not with the town. Pharand was unconvinced. “I’m not an expert but if it’s restricted to certain people in one location, to me it doesn’t sound like it’s a problem in people’s houses because (…) it would be distributed some other way, it wouldn’t be (…) on Principale [only], for example.” Craddock said not all houses on Principale are affected, showing that the main line is not the cause.
Rivard once again took a long term view. “I don’t like pointing the finger at ‘oh it’s not our fault it’s your fault’, (…) it’s the water’s fault, that river is not that clean of a river, it’s got high levels of manganese so the solution is long term, it’s to get away from that source water.” He added that “if we do pump from Sturgeon, I think we have to start looking at a Drinking Water Source Protection Plan for the Sturgeon River as well, because you can’t keep (…) damaging your source water and just expect to go get it from somewhere else further down the line.”
Pellerin said he spoke with a Ministry of Envrironment representative who assured the water was safe to drink, but then admitted that she would not drink it due to its appearance. “This should be a priority number one. It’s been going on for years now, it’s got to move,” he insisted.
Pharand wanted to know if the town had already applied for funding to build the pipeline from Cache Bay to Verner. Craddock said they had not applied yet because of restrictions on funding programs, capped at projects of $5 million. She said they were now looking at the possibility of breaking down the project into phases. “We continue to watch for funding,” she said, and recommended council keep lobbying for special consideration as no existing funding program would cover the project.
Mayor Thorne Rochon said there had been delegations to the Minister of Infrastructure, but that the province was currently focused on housing. She said projects had to be tied to the development of new lots or housing units in order to be considered. “Our argument [was] “we can’t plan for any increased housing or increased density within the settlement area of Verner because our water system can’t support it. (…) It’s kind of a chicken and the egg. (…) We need this project in order to grow,” she explained. However, the province has not been swayed by this argument so far.
Pellerin said that a large subdivision was currently in the works in Verner, and perhaps could be used to support an application. The mayor said she was not aware, while Craddock said funding requirements are restrictive and any project had to be shovel ready and dependent on the water infrastructure improvement in order to qualify.
Staff recommended preparing a more detailed report for council to go over the situation at a future meeting, as there was a lot of technical information to consider. A full package with all details and reports dating back to 2018 will be brought for discussion at the next Water and Sewer committee meeting, set for Sept. 17.
