HomeMy Public PortalAbout2022-07-14_Council_Website Agenda Package_Updated July 12, 2022.pdf
Page 1 of 1 of Agenda Cover Page(s)
MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
AGENDA
Thursday, July 14, 2022
Livestreamed via YouTube at
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC_uKlob3qOA6eD62x1kK5Kw
Office Location: 151 King Street, Chester, NS
1. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER
2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA/ORDER OF BUSINESS
3. PUBLIC INPUT SESSION (15 minutes – 8:45 a.m. to 9:00 a.m.)
4. MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING
4.1 Council – June 30, 2022.
5. COMMITTEE REPORTS
6. PUBLIC PRESENTATIONS
6.1 Sherbrooke Lake Stewardship Committee at 9:15 a.m.
7. MATTERS ARISING
7.1 Infrastructure Development Fund Policy – Second/Final Notice to Adopt.
7.2 NSFM Membership Survey Draft of Responses.
7.3 Request for Decision prepared July 4, 2022 – Community Development & Recreation –
Stanford Lake Water Monitoring Program.
8. CORRESPONDENCE
9. NEW BUSINESS
10. IN CAMERA
11. ADJOURNMENT
APPOINTMENT
9:15 a.m. Sherbrook Lake Stewardship Committee.
277
MUNICIPALITY OF THE DISTRICT OF CHESTER
Minutes of
COUNCIL MEETING
Livestreamed via YouTube from 151 King Street, Chester
On Thursday, June 30, 2022
MEETING CALLED TO ORDER
Warden Webber called the meeting to order at 8:51 a.m.
Present: District 1 – Councillor Veinotte District 5 – Councillor Assaff
District 2 – Deputy Warden Shatford District 6 – Councillor Connors
District 3 – Councillor Wells District 7 – Councillor Church
District 4 – Warden Webber
Staff: Dan McDougall, CAO
Tara Maguire, Deputy CAO (Via Zoom)
Pamela Myra, Municipal Clerk
Erin Lowe, Senior Economic Development Officer
Olivia Corkum, Community Economic Development Officer
Matthew Blair, Director of Infrastructure & Operations
Solicitor: Samuel Lamey, Municipal Solicitor
There was one member of the public in the public gallery.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA/ORDER OF BUSINESS
Additions:
Councillor Connors – District Grants.
2022-280 MOVED by Councillor Church, SECONDED by Deputy Warden Shatford the
agenda and order of business for the June 30, 2022, Council meeting be
approved as amended. ALL IN FAVOUR. MOTION CARRIED.
PUBLIC INPUT
There was no public input.
Council (continued) June 30, 2022 278
MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS
4.1 Council Meeting – June 23, 2022.
2022-281 MOVED by Deputy Warden Shatford, SECONDED by Councillor Church that the
minutes of the June 23, 2022 Council Meeting be approved. ALL IN FAVOUR.
MOTION CARRIED.
COMMITTEE REPORTS
5.1 Recreation and Parks Committee of the Whole – June 20, 2022 – Councillor Veinotte.
2022-282 MOVED by Councillor Church, SECONDED by Councillor Veinotte that the
following recommendation from the June 20, 2022 Recreation and Parks
Committee meeting be approved:
2022-254 – “… give Jeryn Isenor of New Ross $500.00 for her participation
in the U19 Women’s World Floorball Championships in Katowice, Poland
from August 31 to September 4; and that we give Riley Perry of Chester
$500.00 for his participation in the Young Guns Hockey Tournament in
Portland Maine from August 4 to 7.”
ALL IN FAVOUR. MOTION CARRIED.
5.2 Nominating Committee – June 27, 2022 – Councillor Church.
2022-283 MOVED by Councillor Church, SECONDED by Councillor Assaff that
Council approve the following recommendation from the June 27, 2022
Nominating Committee Meeting:
2022-275 – “ the following persons be appointed to the Committees as noted:
Committee Appointments
Required
Recommended Term
Audit Committee 1 Sandy Dumaresq 2 Years
Chester Municipal
Planning Advisory
Committee
5 (Districts 1,
3, 4, 6, 7)
Leslie Taylor (District 1)
Lee Harnish (District 4)
Hasson Hammond
(District 7)
*Readvertise for vacant
positions.
2 Years
Council (continued) June 30, 2022 279
Chester Village
Planning Advisory
Committee (Council
previously approved
to reappoint the
current members if
they wish to re-
offer)
4 Carol Nauss – Yes
John Carroll – Yes
Syd Dumaresq – Yes
*Readvertise for vacant
positions.
2 Years
Chester Volunteer
Fire Service
Committee
3 Kirk Collicutt – 3 Years
Norm Countway – 3
Years
James Robert – 2 Years
2 3-Year
Terms
1 2-Year
Term
Heritage Advisory
Committee
5 Carol Nauss
Tim Harris
Tristan Mills
* Readvertise for vacant
positions.
1 Year
Recreation & Parks
Committee
3 (Districts 1,
4, and 7)
None received.
*Readvertise.
3 Years
Sherbrooke Lake
Park Advisory
Committee
1 Heather Dyment 3 Years
Fences & Arbitration
Committee
1 None received. *
Readvertise for vacant
position.
1 Year
Water Quality
Monitoring
Committee (Fox
Point)
MPAC Appt Ross Shatford 2 Years
Western Regional
Housing
1 None received. *
Readvertise for vacant
position.
3 Years
ALL IN FAVOUR. MOTION CARRIED.
PUBLIC PRESENTATIONS
There were no public presentations.
MATTERS ARISING
Council (continued) June 30, 2022 280
7.1 Request for Direction prepared June 15, 2022 – Corporate & Strategic Management -
Parade Square Beautification Project.
Erin Lowe, Senior Economic Development Officer and Olivia Corkum, Community Economic
Development Officer were present to review the Request for Direction prepared June 15,
2022 regarding the Parade Square Beautification Project.
The Senior Economic Development Officer outlined the completed Phase 1 and how public
consultation was undertaken. Phases 2, 3, and 4 were outlined and it was noted that the
request for today is whether Council wants to proceed, carry out more consultation, or
outline changes to the concept plan.
Funding was discussed and it was noted that the next intake for funding would be in 2023,
but there were no guarantees the funding would be available for future funding.
The lack of positive comments from the public was discussed and the participant summary
was explained. The main comments were that the public don’t want any parking spots
removed from the area. It was also noted that traditionally, residents drive to the Lido Pool
and eat their lunch. Concern was noted about the engagement numbers, and it was
suggested that the engagement piece be opened up for more feedback from residents.
It was noted that the high level estimated cost from the architects was approximately
$250,000.
Councillor Wells (District 3) noted that he met with staff recently to get briefed and also
engaged with some residents during the election and since that time as well. There are
concerns with the recommendation about cutting off the loop at Parade Square which will
limit parking. He also felt there hasn’t been enough engagement with the residents in the
area. He felt it was important to engage with the Village Commission as well. He also felt
that the proposal could be improved/updated as he doesn’t think that the Municipality will
put in $300,000 without financing. Some ideas are excellent, and some are questionable.
It was agreed that investment in this property is not a bad idea as it is heavily used, but
some of the proposal may impact functions, such as Remembrance Day. There may need to
be a modified plan.
Staff were directed to carry out more consultation with the residents and bring back a
modified plan to Council based on the feedback from residents and abutting property
owners as well as the Village Commission.
7.2 Request for Decision prepared June 14, 2022 – Corporate & Strategic Management –
Code of Conduct.
Council (continued) June 30, 2022 281
Tara Maguire, Deputy CAO was present via Zoom to outline the Request for Decision
prepared June 14, 2022 regarding a Code of Conduct for Council. She reviewed the
background as well as the recommendations.
In 2017 the province amended the Municipal Government Act (MGA) to require codes of
conduct for each municipal unit. However, the change hasn’t yet been enacted (Bills 10 and
50). There is a joint committee working on regulations. Staff has taken the draft template
provided by the Province.
It was felt that the regulations are required prior to adopting the policy. It was noted that
the province will be consulting in the next few months, but it wasn’t known how this will
take place.
The Solicitor reviewed the policy and was concerned about some wording and would like to
meet with staff before it is moved forward.
It was agreed the policy should be forwarded for legal review and possibly wait to adopt
the policy until after the regulations are provided.
The Solicitor also noted that he wants to ensure a code of ethical conduct – not
competence; however, there is a mixture of words that may nuance competence.
Staff were directed to meet with the solicitor for review, request the Code of Conduct from
the province and review how they compare to the MLA’s template provided.
NEW BUSINESS
9.1 Request for Decision prepared June 16, 2022 – Community Development &
Recreation - New Private Road Name – Brightside Lane.
Sylvia Dixon, Development & Planning Technician was present and reviewed the Request
for Decision prepared June 16, 2022 regarding a new private road name – Brightside Lane
off of Arthur Hatt Road in Chester Basin.
2022-284 MOVED by Councillor Assaff, SECONDED by Councillor Church that Council
approve the proposed private road name, Brightside Lane off of Arthur Hatt
Road in Chester Basin. ALL IN FAVOUR. MOTION CARRIED.
MATTERS ARISING (continued)
Council (continued) June 30, 2022 282
7.3 Planning Matters Report prepared May 27, 2022 – Community Development &
Recreation – Rezone of Sherbrooke around Sherbrooke Lake from General Basic to
Lakeside Zone.
Garth Sturtevant, Senior Planner was present to review the request to rezone properties
around Sherbrooke Lake from General Basic to Lakeside Zone.
He outlined the information contained in the material provided, reviewing the current
situation, background, and recommended motions from the Municipal Planning Advisory
Committee and staff. The process is now at the stage to rezone the properties.
It was noted that this rezoning will only be applied to properties on the Municipality of the
District of Chester’s side of the lake (and not the properties within the Municipality of the
District of Lunenburg). During discussions the representatives from the Sherbrooke Lake
United Church Camp asked how that would affect their activities as they have peripheral
commercial activities in the shoulder season for weddings, etc. The Lakeside Zone as it is
does not allow commercial operations. Another question arose with regard to Gully Lake
(which is connected at the north end of Sherbrooke Lake). From research it was found that
Gully Lake is a place name, not a lake. Staff are recommending that this extended portion
be included in the rezone as well.
Also discussed was how far inland the zone would be and staff was recommending 300 m.
Staff feel all policy considerations have been met. A Public Information Session was held on
March 29, 2022 at the Forties Community Centre. It was well attended, and good
discussions were held, a positive sign of public engagement working like it should.
The Municipal Planning Advisory Committee met on June 15th and reviewed the
recommendations. However, one area of concern was that the Sherbrooke Lake Camp was
too specific and asked why other types of uses could be allowed. The intent was to be
equitable and fair, and, in this case, staff feel there is a good reason to be specific and
unique. The Camp has been there, and everyone seems supportive of the camp. The
suggestion was to change to not-for-profit camps. Where the zone exists on any lake it
could be done anywhere. They are trying to protect an existing use; future development is
not the intent.
It was agreed that this location on Sherbrooke Lake needs to be specific for this unique
camp and Councillors agreed with recommendation. Staff recommended Option 2.
Councillor Connors indicated that she had attended the information meeting and
appreciated the questions asked and explained and that staff also met with people after the
meeting. They were willing and planned to meet with other individuals. She also sat in the
audience at MPAC and appreciates that discussion as well. They want to be fair and
Council (continued) June 30, 2022 283
consistent across the municipality and she also agreed with the staff recommendation. The
camp is unique.
Councillor Connors asked if the date of July 28th could be moved out a week to allow the ad
to be placed in the Community Newsletter that is issued on July 27th.
The Senior Planner noted that if Council gives first reading today, he will prepare the ads
and prep the mailing list for the 230 properties affected.
He noted that with rezoning, the process would include putting a sign on the property,
however, what he has done in this instance as a compromise is four signs for the entrances
to the area.
2022-285 MOVED by Councillor Connors, SECONDED by Councillor Wells that Council
approve the rezoning of properties around Sherbrooke Lake (within the
Municipality of Chester) from the General Basic Zone to the Lakeside Zone, and
further that the Lakeside Zone extend 300m inland, beginning at the Ordinary
High Water Mark, with a change to the proposed wording that the listing of the
Sherbrooke Lake United Church Camp as a permitted use be changed to state
that “not-for-profit camps” are a permitted use in the Lakeside Zone;
And that Council approve the rezoning of properties around Sherbrooke Lake
including Gully Lake (within the Municipality of Chester) from the General Basic
Zone to the Lakeside Zone, and further that the Lakeside Zone extend 300m
inland, beginning at the Ordinary High-Water Mark.
ALL IN FAVOUR. MOTION CARRIED.
2022-286 MOVED by Councillor Connors, SECONDED by Councillor Wells that Council set
a date for the Public Hearing for Thursday, August 4, 2022 at 6:30 p.m. in
Municipal Council Chambers, 151 King Street. ALL IN FAVOUR. MOTION
CARRIED.
Break from 9:45 a.m. to 9:58 a.m.
CORRESPONDENCE
8.1 Correspondence from Denise Peterson-Rafuse regarding concerns on the proposed
hotel project in the Village of Chester.
Councillor Wells commended Denise Peterson-Rafuse for the well-reasoned letter noting
that she put a lot of time into the information and gives some food for thought. Councillor
Wells noted that she raised issues Council is already aware of and should be discussed.
Council (continued) June 30, 2022 284
Warden Webber agreed that there are issues that may be an issue, however, the
development currently meets the requirements of the existing by-law.
Councillor Wells indicated that he was aware a letter had been forwarded to Ms. Peterson-
Rafuse regarding the project, however, the public needs to know that water and sewer are
still issues that will not go away.
Discussion was held with the following comments:
This is an as-of-right development and within the landholder’s right as per land use
by-law.
Water and sewer are issues that Council are aware of.
The adequacy of the water supply – that is hard to answer even if there is a
hydrogeologist report.
The need to have a debate of what the Municipality is going to do about water in
Chester Village.
The previous plebiscite was held in 2018 and roughly half said yes, but a little more
than half said no.
Potential to service areas outside of the village with water as there are other areas
with water difficulties.
Potential well field in Marriotts Cove (discussed by CBCL in 2017) and the favoured
system rather than surface water (susceptible to blue algae, pollution, etc.).
Review the studies that have already been completed and escalate costs to provide
some sort of number to refresh everyone.
Have the summary of the previous information provided to Council to review prior
to deciding.
The proposed development on Stanford Lake Road will also put pressure on the
water supply.
It was agreed to respond to Ms. Peterson-Rafuse to advise her that Council will be revisiting
the water strategy.
NEW BUSINESS (continued)
9.2 Request for Decision prepared June 20, 2022 – Community Development &
Recreation - Designated Community Fund Request – New Ross Trails.
2022-287 MOVED by Councillor Assaff, SECONDED by Deputy Warden Shatford Council
approve the request of the New Ross Trails Society for funds from the
Designated Community Fund in the amount of $450.00. ALL IN FAVOUR.
MOTION CARRIED.
Council (continued) June 30, 2022 285
9.3 Council District Grants:
a. District 6 – Charing Cross Garden Club - $500.
b. District 6 – New Ross Consolidated School - $2,000.
c. District 6 – New Ross Legion Branch 79 - $1,000.
d. District 6 – New Ross Summer Evening Market - $500.
Councillor Connors reviewed the requests, noting that the two she provided this morning (c
and d) have not yet been provided to the Director of Community Development &
Recreation, but the District 6 grants are not overspent.
2022-288 MOVED by Councillor Connors, SECONDED by Councillor Assaff that Council
approve the following Council District Grants:
District 6 – Charing Cross Garden Club - $500.
District 6 – New Ross Consolidated School - $2,000.
District 6 – New Ross Legion Branch 79 - $1,000.
District 6 – New Ross Summer Evening Market - $500.
ALL IN FAVOUR. MOTION CARRIED.
9.4 Infrastructure Development Fund Policy – Corporate & Strategic Management.
The Deputy CAO outlined the information included in the draft Infrastructure Development
Fund Policy P-110. Council has committed 100% of last years Deed Transfer Tax
(2021/2022) to the fund and the policy establishes how future contributions would be
determined, i.e., 50% of Deed Transfer annually unless Council, by motion, approves
another percentage. The policy also establishes the guiding principles and what the fund
can be used for.
The question was asked about the inclusion of active transportation and whether that was
part of the discussion previously.
The CAO noted it is up to Council if they wish active transportation to be included. It was
noted that the policy says, “other core municipal services” and to promote growth and to
put infrastructure in place to allow growth.
It was noted that the fund is basically to provide for sewer and water; Council did not want
to include sidewalks or trails. However, the words water supply, treatment and distribution
should be included.
2022-289 MOVED by Councillor Wells, SECONDED by Councillor Church that Council give
notice and conduct First Notice to adopt the Infrastructure Development Fund
Policy P-110 with the amendment to remove “active transportation systems”
Council (continued) June 30, 2022 286
and add the words “water supply, treatment, and distribution”. ALL IN
FAVOUR. MOTION CARRIED.
9.5 Memo dated June 28, 2022 from NS Department of Public Works regarding the
2022/23 J-Class Subdivision Street Paving.
The CAO noted that there are overruns of more than 10% which require Council approval.
He outlined the province’s process which includes this request when there are overruns.
He noted that this fall the J-Class Road listing and the policy will come to Council to
determine a more streamlined process.
2022-290 MOVED by Councillor Assaff, SECONDED by Deputy Warden Shatford that
Council approves the cost overruns for the paving of J-Class Subdivision Streets
as follows:
Road Name
Or
i
g
i
n
a
l
Es
t
i
m
a
t
e
Te
n
d
e
r
Am
o
u
n
t
Ne
w
C
o
s
t
Sh
a
r
e
Am
o
u
n
t
%
O
v
e
r
Or
i
g
i
n
a
l
Es
t
i
m
a
t
e
Adams Road, Paving $60,000 $71,000 $35,500 +18.3%
Brunswick Street,
Paving
$50,000 $62,000 $31,000 +24%
Myra Road, Paving $50,000 $63,000 $31,500 +26%
Discussion:
Councillor Veinotte noted he was glad the province was paving a few roads,
but he would like to do more.
Deputy Warden Shatford asked if we have requested the province to up the
ante and Councillor Veinotte noted that the MLA was here, and it was noted
to her at that time.
Warden Webber commented that he felt it would be part of the Service
Exchange discussions.
Councillor Wells would like to work with the MLA to get things done and
asked about the quarterly meetings with the NS Department of Public Works
and the CAO indicated that he would set up a meeting.
ALL IN FAVOUR. MOTION CARRIED.
IN CAMERA
There were no In Camera items for discussion.
Council (continued) June 30, 2022 287
ADJOURNMENT
2022-291 MOVED by Deputy Warden Shatford, SECONDED by Councillor Church the
meeting adjourn. (10:30 a.m.)
___________________________ ___________________________
Allen Webber Pamela Myra
Warden Municipal Clerk
2022-07-11
1
Sherbrooke Lake
2021 Overview
-The Trophic State index of the Lake
has remained consistent over the
last three years. 2021 mesotrophic.
-Levels of Phosphorous & Nitrogen
below threshold in lake & stream
sites.
-Chlorophyll-a & Phycocyanin levels
both below threshold at all sites
during time of sampling.
-Heavy metals in sediment
improving since 2019.
Sherbrooke Lake
2021 Results –Phycocyanin
New Total Algae Probe this year that
measures Chlorophyll-a and
Phycocyanin.
Converted RFU to Cells/100mL. Threshold
set by WHO of 20,000 cell/mL (Level 1) &
100,000 cells/mL (Level 2).
1
2
2022-07-11
2
Sherbrooke Lake
Results – Surface Temperature
Stream sites vary in terms of exceeding
the 20-degree threshold set by the NSSA.
Large swing at Sherbrooke River.
Lake sites consistently exceed the 20
degree threshold in the summer months.
14
16
18
20
22
24
26
June July August September October
Te
m
p
e
r
a
t
u
r
e
(
°
C
)
Months
Lake 1 Lake 2 Lake 3 Lake 4
Sherbrooke Lake
Results – Surface Dissolved Oxygen
Dissolved Oxygen readings at all sites show levels
well above the 6.5 mg/L threshold set by CCME.
Cold-water species require DO levels above 6.5
mg/L
7.9
8.1
8.3
8.5
8.7
8.9
9.1
June July August September October
Di
s
s
o
l
v
e
d
O
x
y
g
e
n
(
m
g
/
L
)
Date
Lake 1 Lake 2 Lake 3 Lake 4
6.5
7
7.5
8
8.5
9
9.5
June July September
Di
s
s
o
l
v
e
d
O
x
y
g
e
n
(
m
g
/
L
)
Date
Sherbrooke River Forties River Pine Lake Brook Zwicker Brook
3
4
2022-07-11
3
Sherbrooke Lake
Results – pH
pH readings at all sites show consistently low pH,
in most cases dropping below the 6.5 level set by
CCME. Consistent with general Southshore pH
levels.
4.5
5
5.5
6
6.5
7
June July August September October
pH
Date
Lake 1 Lake 2 Lake 3 Lake 4
4.5
5
5.5
6
6.5
7
June July September
pH
Date
Sherbrooke River Forties River Pine Lake Brook Zwicker Brook
Sherbrooke Lake
Results – Lake Total Phosphorous (TP)
Total Phosphorous levels in the lake are very low
compared to other years. Far below the 0.02mg/L
threshold set by MOE.
0.000
0.005
0.010
0.015
0.020
To
t
a
l
P
h
o
s
p
h
o
r
u
s
(
m
g
/
L
)
Date
Lake 1
2018 2019 2021
0.002
0.004
0.006
0.008
0.01
To
t
a
l
P
h
o
s
p
h
o
r
u
s
(
m
g
/
L
)
Date
Lake 2
2018 2019 2021
0.002
0.004
0.006
0.008
0.01
0.012
To
t
a
l
P
h
o
s
p
h
o
r
u
s
(
m
g
/
L
)
Date
Lake 4
2018 2019 2021
5
6
2022-07-11
4
Sherbrooke Lake
Results – Stream Total Phosphorous (TP)
Total Phosphorous levels at the stream site fall
below the 0.03 mg/L threshold set by MOE.
0.010
0.012
0.014
0.016
0.018
0.020
0.022
0.024
0.026
June July September
To
t
a
l
P
h
o
s
p
h
o
r
u
s
(
m
g
/
L
)
Date
Sherbrooke River Forties River Pine Lake Brook Zwicker Brook
Sherbrooke Lake
Results – Lake Total Nitrogen (TN)
Total Nitrogen levels in 2021 are varied compared to
previous years. Higher levels in Sept & Oct but well
below the 0.9 mg/L guideline set by Dodds & Welch
0.150
0.250
0.350
0.450
To
t
a
l
N
i
t
r
o
g
e
n
(
m
g
/
L
)
Date
Lake 1
2018 2019 2021
0.150
0.200
0.250
0.300
To
t
a
l
N
i
t
r
o
g
e
n
(
m
g
/
L
)
Date
Lake 2
2018 2019 2021
0.15
0.25
0.35
0.45
To
t
a
l
N
i
t
r
o
g
e
n
(
m
g
/
L
)
Date
Lake 4
2018 2019 2021
7
8
2022-07-11
5
Sherbrooke Lake
Results – Stream Total Nitrogen (TN)
Total Nitrogen levels at the stream site fall below the
0.9 mg/L guideline set by Dodds & Welch. Levels
higher in Sept at all sites & threshold is approached.
0.000
0.100
0.200
0.300
0.400
0.500
0.600
0.700
0.800
0.900
June July September
To
t
a
l
N
i
t
r
o
g
e
n
(
m
g
/
L
)
Date
Sherbrooke River Forties River Pine Lake Brook Zwicker Brook
Sherbrooke Lake
Results – Fecal Coliform & E. coli
E. coli levels were very low in 2021. All samples at the Lake sites
registered as undetected except for three, which showed 2 CFU.
Stream readings were slightly higher, but well under the 400 CFU
& 1000 CFU thresholds set by Health Canada.
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
June July September
E.
c
o
l
i
(
C
F
U
/
1
0
0
m
L
)
Stream Site
Sherbrooke River Forties River Pine Lake Brook Zwicker Brook
9
10
2022-07-11
6
Sherbrooke Lake
Results – Sediment Samples
Sediment samples show no exceedances at any of
the stream sites. The samples from the lake sites
show 7 exceedances at lake sites 1, 2 & 4.
Generally, the sediment quality has improved
since 2019.
UNITS Lake 1 Lake 2 Lake 3 Lake 4
Metals 2019 2021 2018 2019 2021 2018 2019 2021
Acid Extractable Arsenic (As) mg/kg 8.4 4.8 16 12 6.8 8.3 8.1 9.8
Acid Extractable Cadmium (Cd) mg/kg 0.76 0.31 1 0.99 0.46 1.5 0.76 0.63
Acid Extractable Lead (Pb) mg/kg 34 8.8 49 24 8 13 13 8.9
Acid Extractable Mercury (Hg) mg/kg 0.27 0.15 0.27 0.2 0.12 0.16 ND 0.12
Sherbrooke Lake
Results – Trophic State Index
Annual Trophic State Index
assessments show that the Lake is
consistently straddling the line
between oligotrophic and
mesotrophic. In 2021 the TSI score
was 39.4, technically classifying the
lake as oligotrophic (low
productivity).
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
TS
I
V
a
l
u
e
Years
TSI Secchi Chl-a TP
11
12
2022-07-11
7
Sherbrooke Lake
Algae Pilot Project
A small algae monitoring pilot project was launched in 2021.
The aim of the project was to develop a baseline
understanding of the frequency and blue-green algae blooms
in the lake. 7 microcystin samples were taken from various
locations in the lake as a baseline. All 7 samples showed no
presence of microcystin, and low levels of Chlorophyll-α.
Depth profiles were also taken using the new Algae probe.
Site Probe (RFU) Sample (Chl-a ug/L)
Forties 0.72 9.42
Algae Bay 0.71 3.48
Site Probe (RFU) Sample (Chl- a ug/L)
Bangay 3 0.89 3.29
Bangay 3a n/a 4.13
Deep Cove 1 0.75 3.55
Inlet 4 0.88 3.01
Municipal 2 0.8 3.41
Sherbrooke Lake
Conclusion and Recommendations
Sherbrooke lake has generally good water quality. The trophic
state index assessment demonstrates an unproductive system
that is unfavorable for algae growth. However, the threat of
algae blooms does still exist in Sherbrooke Lake and the
surrounding streams. The sediment quality also appears to be
improving since 2019.
Coastal Action is recommending that this project be
continued in the same capacity as previous years, with the
monthly sampling scaled back to three samples, rather than
six. The Sherbrooke Lake Stewardship Committee will look to
explore options for a robust algae monitoring program in
2023.
13
14
FIRST NOTICE – JUNE 30, 2022
SECOND/FINAL NOTICE – JULY 14, 2022
Municipality of the District of Chester
Infrastructure
Development Fund
Policy
Policy #110
Infrastructure Development Fund Policy
Notice of Intention to Adopt: Council – Month XX, 202X (202X-XXX)
First Notice: Council – Month XX, 202X (202X-XXX)
Second Notice: Council – Month XX, 202X (202X-XXX)
Effective Date: Month x, 202x
MUNICIPALITY OF THE DISTRICT OF CHESTER
POLICY #110
1. INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT FUND POLICY PURPOSE
1.1. This purpose of this policy is to establish Council’s intention to support the growth and
development of healthy, efficient, and sustainable communities through the creation of an
Infrastructure Development Fund.
1.2. The objectives of the Infrastructure Development Fund Policy are to:
a. Establish the guiding principles, primary objectives, key management and administrative
responsibilities, and standards of care for an Infrastructure Development Fund;
b. Establish Council’s commitment to support residential and commercial development
through the creation and expansion of capital infrastructure including wastewater
collection and treatment systems, water supply, treatment, and distribution systems, and
other core municipal infrastructure.
2. GUIDING PRINCIPLES
2.1. Municipal Council recognizes that it has a role to play in leading and partnering in the creation of
residential and commercial development.
2.2. With respect to residential development Council recognizes it has a role not only ensuring land
use planning supports housing but that infrastructure investments supports the development of
a range of housing options including affordable and attainable (low-end of market) housing.
2.3. Municipal infrastructure encourages compact development, expands commercial and residential
growth opportunities, and can address the growing climate crisis, resulting in significant
environmental benefits and socioeconomic returns.
2.4. The Infrastructure Development Fund will assist in meeting the funding requirements of matching
programs developed by senior levels of government for the grown and development of capital
infrastructure.
3. CONTRIBUTIONS TO INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT FUND
3.1. Fifty (50) percent of the funds generated through the collection of the Deed Transfer Tax shall be
designated to an Infrastructure Development Fund to be held in an Infrastructure Development
Fund reserve.
3.2. Council may, by motion, designate a different amount to the fund each year, which may be from
a different source of funds, but in no case shall they contribute less than 25% of the Deed Transfer
revenues in a fiscal year.
4. INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT FUND MANAGEMENT
4.1. The Infrastructure Development Fund reserve will be invested in accordance with a Council
approved Investment Policy.
Infrastructure Development Fund Policy
Notice of Intention to Adopt: Council – Month XX, 202X (202X-XXX)
First Notice: Council – Month XX, 202X (202X-XXX)
Second Notice: Council – Month XX, 202X (202X-XXX)
Effective Date: Month x, 202x
4.2. The Infrastructure Development reserve shall be used to fund the costs of expansion and growth
of new or existing municipally owned infrastructure that supports both commercial and
residential development.
Membership Survey to Support the Service Exchange Renegotiation and MGA
Review Committee
Purpose of this survey:
As Nova Scotia municipalities head into the renegotiation of the Service Exchange Agreement, it
is important to take stock of their needs and aspirations to better serve their constituents. The
Province is also reviewing the Municipal Government Act (MGA) and Halifax Regional Municipality
Charter (HRMC) and it is important for NSFM to collectively envision an MGA/HRMC that helps
municipalities confront modern challenges. This survey will help to develop an in- depth
understanding of the problems and opportunities that should be addressed in these two
importance processes.
This survey includes 20 questions and is organized into four sections. The first section focuses on
service exchange, the second section focuses on the MGA/HRMC, the third section focuses on
municipal revenue. The survey ends with questions about special considerations that your
municipal unit requires and final comments.
Please note, this information is collected for internal use only. Survey responses will only be
reported in aggregate form. Information that identifies specific municipalities will not be released.
If you have any questions, please contact info@nsfm.ca.
Q1: What is the name of your municipality?
Municipality of the District of Chester.
Questions related to the Service Exchange Agreement Renegotiation
In 1994, the Provincial-Municipal Service Exchange Agreement reallocated responsibilities and
restructured the fiscal framework. The objectives of the Service Exchange Agreement were 1) to
create strong, financially viable local governments, 2) to develop a clearer, fairer, provincial-
municipal partnership, and 3) to rationalize service provision.
Information for Q2 and Q3:
Under the Service Exchange Agreement, the provincial government took responsibility for:
- Social Services and Child Welfare
- Public Health and Long-term Care
6
- Administration of Justice
- Environment (regulatory aspects of sanitation and health standards)
- Highway Police Patrols and central police services
The provincial government also continued to hold a range of responsibilities, such as those
pertaining to healthcare, education, housing, and provincial roads.
Municipalities took responsibility for:
- Making mandatory contributions to correctional services
- Policing
- Local Roads
- Sidewalks
- Public Transit
- Land-use Planning
- Building Inspection
- Recreation
- Control of Invasive Weed Species
Municipalities continued to be responsible for water and wastewater, management of solid
waste, public libraries, and mandatory contributions to education and regional housing
authority net operating losses.
Some municipalities also pay a per kilometre service exchange balancing fee (initially $3500
per/km pegged to CPI) in lieu of accepting the transfer of local roads under the Provincial-
Municipal Service Exchange.
Q2: Considering the responsibilities listed above, which responsibilities does your council
believe municipalities should maintain or assume and why?\
Maintain:
Local Roads (new). The Municipality also would be interested in an exchange that provides
expenditure room (for full life cycle costs of these roads) for the Municipality to take-over
ownership and management of local J class roads. This would allow for longer range
planning for preventative maintenance and renewal; and, the Municipality would become
the traffic authority to allow for local decision making related to snow and ice control
standards, road safety, parking, traffic calming facilities, etc. The current Provincial funding
allocation for J class road renewal ($2 million annually province-wide for repaving) is
inadequate and has not been adjusted, even to match to inflation, for many years.
Land Use Planning
Sidewalks
Recreation
Solid Waste
Water & Wastewater
6
Trails – We currently maintain the trails; the Province should give consideration of turning
over land to municipalities.
Public Libraries
Public Transit
Building & Fire Inspection
Local Policing - However, municipalities need to have the ability to manage costs, priority
setting, and service levels and other resources.
Q3: Considering the responsibilities listed above, which responsibilities does your council
believe the Province should maintain or assume and why?
Administration of Justice
Correctional Services including corrections costs (municipal fiscal transfers to the
Province for this service should be eliminated).
Policing – highway patrol & central services
Environment – regulatory aspects.
Social Services/Child Welfare
Public Health/Long Term Care
Policing
Education
Information for Q4: Municipalities often respond to challenges and opportunities in their
jurisdictions at their own discretion.
Many municipalities continue to make significant expenditures in the areas of Public Health,
Environmental Health Services, Long-Term Care Facilities, Housing, Public Safety, Physician
Recruitment, Economic Development, and Arts and Culture.
Q4: What discretionary expenditures by your municipality does your council believe should be
better supported by the Province?
Public Health.
Environmental Health Services.
Public Safety.
Physician Recruitment.
Senior Safety.
Housing.
Bridges, including trail bridges.
Paved shoulders on provincial arterial and collector roads.
Tourism promotion and support.
Q5: To provide a sense of priorities, state the top three municipal expenditure responsibilities
that your municipal council believes should be reviewed and why?
6
Local Roads
Corrections & Policing
Public Housing Operating deficits
Q6: What new service responsibilities would your municipality find unacceptable?
Services of a general nature and should not be susceptible to ability of a municipality to
finance.
Services that should be consistent across the province such as Health Care or Education.
The municipality would not be receptive to new costs that local Councils would not have
decision making authority.
We would also not be receptive to new fiscal transfers for provincial services.
Questions related to the Municipal Government Act Review
Since the last MGA Review in 2015, several changes have been made to the MGA. These
changes have granted municipal authority to take actions that were previously prohibited.
These changes allow municipalities to invest and make decisions in new aspects of the
communities that they govern.
Q7: The following question provides a list of recent changes to the MGA that have implications
for the abilities and responsibilities of municipalities. Using the checklist below, please indicate
the discretionary abilities that your council believes are useful for your municipality.
☒ Expanded power to expend
☒ Mandate to establish a Municipal Code of Conduct
☐ Ability to finance developments that increase accessibility
☐ Ability to enable municipalities to sell land below market price in some cases
☐ Ability to engage in negotiation for the purpose of increasing affordable housing units
☐ Ability to create commercial development districts
☐ Others?
Q8: What discretionary abilities conferred by the MGA does your municipal council believe are
not useful and why?
Ability to finance developments that increase accessibility - There is some concern that this
will create an expectation to fund businesses who are required to comply with a provincial
mandate.
Ability to create commercial development districts – Currently the MGA only allows for this
in serviced areas – does not help most rural communities. This would be a power we would
like to see expanded to all areas, not just those serviced by water and wastewater.
6
Ability to enable municipalities to sell land below market price in some cases – For most
municipalities this only applies to sale of land to a non-profit which is limiting. CBRM has
ability to sell to individuals for less than market value.
Q9: What additional discretionary abilities does your municipal council believe should be
granted by changes to the MGA?
Facilitating public-private partnerships
Giving more flexible revenue-raising authority to municipalities
Near shore planning
Water lots
Although not a change to the MGA, we would like to see more flexibility in our ability to
spend gas tax including the elimination of stacking restriction particularly for environmental
stewardship and protection projects where significant capital investment in smaller
communities without the benefit of economies of scale present in larger/denser settlement
areas.
Information for Q10: A number of other federal and provincial statutes and regulations have
implications for municipal budgets as non-discretionary expenses.
Q10: Using the checklist below, please indicate which regulations or responsibilities your
municipal council finds to be causing considerable pressure on your budget and capacity to
accomplish core goals?
(Checklist Response List)
☒ Surplus Schools
☐ Property Valuation Assessment Services
☒ Federal Wastewater Systems Effluent Regulations
☐ Cost of Police Evidentiary Lab Analysis Services
☐ Minimum Planning Requirements (Coastal Protection Act)
☐ (Upcoming) Worker Compensation Board Premiums for Volunteer Fire Fighters
Q11: Are there any other responsibilities brought about by statutes or regulations not
mentioned above that add significant pressure on your budget?
Accessibility Act
Policing Costs
Q12: If your county or district municipality elects a warden, please indicate whether, in the
opinion of your municipal council, the warden system should be replaced by the mayoral
system.
No
6
Q13: Village governance is established in Part XVII of the MGA. In the view of your
municipality, should villages be consolidated with districts and counties? Please explain why or
why not.
In the mid twentieth century (1950s?) rural municipalities did not have the authority to provide
all the “urban services” that Towns had the authority to provide so the Village Services Act was
developed and passed to provide authority for urban services in areas of rural municipalities
where denser settlement pattern existed or were desired. Over time, this has changed and rural
municipalities now have the authority, and do, provide all the urban services that Towns can
provide. The existence of two elected bodies for the provision of municipal/local services in
some communities creates a duplication of governance and may result in higher costs,
duplication of services, confusion to the public, etc.
The Village of Chester does provide services that are important to the area and are valued by
residents and property owners. The Municipality is open to discussions with the Village about
how services are governed, planned, and delivered.
The consolidation of the Village of Chester with the Municipality is not a current priority of the
Council.
The consolidation of Villages with rural municipalities should not be forced.
Information for Q14: Municipal mergers can help municipalities cooperate rather than engage in
competition with each other. Consolidation is a new approach to municipal mergers that is more
collaborative for the municipal partners than dissolution or amalgamation. Below is a chart that describes
the difference between consolidation and amalgamation.
Consolidation Amalgamation
Examples Windsor West Hants Halifax Regional Municipality
Cape Breton Regional Municipality
Overview Municipal Leadership Provincial Leadership
“Bottom Up” Process “Top Down” Process
Legislation Special Legislation for each merger
Joint Councils make the merger decision
Councils request special legislation
Municipal Government Act, Part XVII
NSUARB Reviews Municipal proposals
Cabinet issues merger order
Structure Joint Transition Committee Independent Coordinator
Joint Committee recommends
Coordinator
Joint Committee develops organization
Staffed with municipal staff, consultants
Joint Committee hires first CAO
Boundaries reviewed by NSUARB
Joint Committee organizes first election
Cabinet Chooses Coordinator Coordinator
develops organization Staffed by experts,
consultants Coordinator hires first CAO
Boundaries reviewed by NSUARB
Coordinator organizes first election
Source: Antigonish Fact Sheet “Consolidation or Amalgamation? What is the Difference?”,
https://antigonish.ca/
6
Q14: Under what conditions does your council believe municipal consolidation is advisable?
Reasons could include fiscal insolvency, limited access to qualified personnel, infrequency of
competitive elections, or an effort to decrease costs.
We believe that consolidation should not be forced but believe it should be considered when
the public or the municipal councils affected request consolidation.
Q15: What incentives could be put in place to make amalgamation a viable option?
Where amalgamation and/or consolidation is desirable there should be a mutual agreement of
the affected parties including the provincial government. Financial support from the provincial
government should be considered when essential or desirable for an orderly transition to
ensure significant one-time costs do not create short term cost pressures on the consolidated
municipal unit; and, to support investment in core infrastructure or programs that was not
possible due to fiscal insolvency of a party to the consolidation, etc.
Questions related to municipal revenue
Q16: Municipalities can be supported in fulfilling all responsibilities with new or expanded
sources of revenue. What new or expanded revenue sources or tools does your municipal
council believe to be most viable?
Private public partnerships.
Infrastructure Funding – We would like to see more frequent ICIP funding for core
municipal infrastructure.
Canadian Community Building Fund/“Gas tax” match from the province would provide a
more stable and predictable approach to funding instead of application based programs for
funding.
More flexibility to set deed transfer rates. There should be ability to have different rates for
different categories of uses.
We also would like to see greater flexibility in the property tax structure
Information for Q17 and Q18:
Municipalities benefit from a range of grants including grants-in-lieu of taxes, the Municipal
Financial Capacity Grant, and the Towns Foundation Grant.
Grants-in-lieu of Taxes include Farmland Grant, Nova Scotia Power Grants-in-lieu of Taxes, and
Provincial or Federal grants-in-lieu of Taxes.
Other Grant Programs include a) Emergency Services Provider Fund, b) Municipal Innovation
Program, c) Provincial Capital Assistance Program, d) Flood Risk Infrastructure, e) Investment
Program, f) Fire Protection Grant, g) Municipal Flood Line Mapping Program, h) Beautification
and Streetscaping Program, i) Community Works Program, j) Canadian Community Building
Fund (formerly the Gas Tax), k) 911 grant.
6
Q17: What grants has your municipality received for operational expenses and how could
these grants be improved?
Grants-in-lieu of Taxes
Farmland Grant
Nova Scotia Power Grants-in-lieu of Taxes
Provincial or Federal grants-in-lieu of Taxes.
Beautification and Streetscaping Program
Broadly, more time is needed between announcement of grant and application
closing
Some programs would be better utilized if funding allocated annually to each
municipal unit provided that a project met a set of criteria (i.e. community works,
beautification).
Some grant programs can also be better used if municipalities could use the funds
to support local businesses directly (i.e. beautification grants to set up façade
programs).
Q18: What grants has your municipality received for capital expenses and how could these
grants be improved?
Provincial Capital Assistance Program
Flood Risk Infrastructure Investment Program
Canadian Community Building Fund (formerly the Gas Tax)
Investing in Community Infrastructure Program
We would like to see more flexibility in the projects that can be funded, and how
municipalities are able to spend the funds.
Programs that provide for a sustained and consistent source of funds would allow us
to better plan and utilize the funds.
More time between grant announcement and application closing.
Special considerations and other comments
Q19: Is there anything about your municipality that your council believes deserves special
consideration in terms of expenditure responsibilities, legislation, or financial support?
We believe that there should be better recognition of municipalities as an order of
government.
Q20: Is there anything else that your municipal council would like to share?
We would like to see a program for paved shoulders/AT rather than 100% municipal
funding. There are instances across the province where shoulders have been paved by the
Provincial government or have been cost shared. In other cases, the funding rests entirely
on the municipality. If the province is committed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions,
and promoting healthy lifestyle choices, they should make AT the easy and safe option by
6
promoting paved shoulders. A policy to pave shoulders should be a shared provincial and
municipal responsibility with an adequate and stable source of funds.
The Province should not intervene or be involved in setting property tax or use it as a form
of taxation. This is the main municipal source of revenue. We believe that this should also
include the recently introduced 5% deed transfer tax.
REQUEST FOR DECISION
REPORT TO: Municipal Council
MEETING DATE: July 14, 2022
DEPARTMENT: Community Development & Recreation
SUBJECT: Stanford Lake Water Monitoring Program
ORIGIN: Council discussion on May 12, 2022
Date: July 4, 2022 Prepared by: Garth Sturtevant, Senior Planner
Date: Reviewed by:
Date: July 8, 2022 Authorized by: Tara Maguire, Deputy CAO
RECOMMENDED MOTION
1. That Municipal Council approve the water quality monitoring program for Stanford Lake for the 2022
season as proposed by Coastal Action (Appendix A) with a program budget of $12,988.45.
CURRENT SITUATION
Following a decision to continue water quality monitoring for the 2022 season at Fox Point Lake, a discussion
amongst Council resulted in direction being provided to staff regarding additional water quality monitoring. This
included direction to work with Coastal Action to design a program, similar to what is currently taking place on
Fox Point Lake and Sherbrooke Lake, for implementation on Stanford Lake. In addition, Council directed staff to
work with Coastal Action to devise a wider ranging water quality monitoring program for the whole of the
Municipality.
Coastal Action has provided a suggested program scope and budget (attached) for monitoring Stanford Lake,
this requires approval from Council for the 2022 season.
BACKGROUND
In response to other water quality monitoring taking place in the Municipality, coupled with the proposed
development of 100+ residential units directly north of Stanford Lake, Council directed staff to work with Coastal
Action to develop a water quality monitoring program the lake. The intent of the program in it’s first year will be
to determine baseline water quality conditions prior to any substantial work beginning on the proposed
residential development. If the program is continued during the construction phase, it will provide data on
changes to the lake.
DISCUSSION
Stanford Lake Proposal
An application has been made to develop 100+ residential units on property north of Stanford Lake. In response
to this proposal and to concerns expressed by neighbouring property owners, Council asked staff to work with
Coastal Action to determine a program suitable for monitoring the water quality of Stanford Lake. As Coastal
Action provides the existing contracted water quality monitoring for Fox Point Lake and Sherbrooke Lake, their
staff quickly put together a recommended program for consideration by Council.
The proposal submitted by Coastal Action is attached as Appendix A. Highlights from the proposal include:
R e q u e s t f o r D e c i s i o n P a g e | 2
• Designed as a one-year program. Following completion of the program, Council could consider
extending the program or including Stanford Lake in a larger, more wide-ranging municipal water quality
monitoring program;
• Monthly sampling to take place from June through September 2022;
• Testing parameters to include: E. coli, total phosphorus, total nitrogen, total suspended solids, and
chlorophyll-a and phycocyanin;
• A single sediment sample to be assessed for suite of metals;
• Rainfall dependent sampling at inlet and outlet following a period of significant rain.
These results will provide a general insight to the overall water quality of Stanford Lake under current
conditions. The program will not be able to identify any potential sources of bacteria but will provide insight as
to whether any concerns exist prior to the development north of the lake. Coastal Action will provide a brief
summary report following the season to outline the findings and any recommendations for additional testing or
improvements to the program should it be extended for additional seasons.
The proposal (Appendix A) includes a budget for the 2022 season. The total amount being $12,988.45 to
complete the scope of work as outlined.
Municipal Wide Lake Monitoring Program
In addition to direction to devise a monitoring program for 2022 for Stanford Lake, at the May 12th Council
meeting, direction was given to pursue development of a wider scale program to monitor lake health across the
Municipality. Staff have had several discussions with Coastal Action, but due to timing and staffing levels at
Coastal Action, it was decided this was not feasible to design and implement in the 2022 season. Staff will
continue discussions with Coastal Action and expect to have a draft program to present to Council by early 2023
for consideration and implementation pending Council approval.
OPTIONS
1. That Municipal Council approve the water quality monitoring program for Stanford Lake for the 2022
season as proposed by Coastal Action (Appendix A) with a program budget of $12,988.45.
2. That Municipal Council reject the proposed monitoring program for Stanford Lake.
3. That Municipal Council request changes to the proposed program to monitor Stanford Lake (please
specify)
IMPLICATIONS
By-Law/Policy
The following Municipal Planning Strategy Policies apply to this proposal:
E-6: Council may work with developers and other local partners to implement ongoing water quality monitoring
projects, where deemed necessary.
E-15: The Municipality shall explore programs and partnerships to monitor and report on freshwater quality, as
needed.
Financial/budgetary
The financial impacts are direct in that the program requires authorization of an unbudgeted expenditure of
$12,988.45. Beyond this obvious cost, there are no other known financial implications.
R e q u e s t f o r D e c i s i o n P a g e | 3
Environmental
The purpose of the program is to determine the baseline health of the lake, whether there are any existing
concerns related to nutrients or algal blooms.
Strategic Priorities
The approval of the 2022 monitoring program for Stanford Lake will assist the Municipality in advancing the
following Priority Outcomes of the 2021-24 Strategic Priorities Framework:
Priority Outcomes: Environmental Stewardship
1. Support environmental conservation & protection initiatives and efforts to tackle the impact of climate
change.
Work Program Implications
The addition of Stanford Lake to the lakes currently monitored will require additional staff time to oversee the
program, correspond with Coastal Action and prepare two to three reports annually to provide council with
results of the program and to consider extension of the program for future years.
Currently the Senior Planner provides this support to the Fox Point Lake Water Quality Monitoring Committee
and the Director of Community Development and Recreation provides support to the Sherbrooke Lake
Committee. It has not yet been determined who will be the responsible staff person for Stanford Lake if
approved.
Has Legal review been completed? ___ Yes _ _ No X N/A
ATTACHMENTS
Appendix A - Stanford Lake Proposal Coastal Action
45 School Street, Suite 403, PO Box 489, Mahone Bay, NS, B0J 2E0
Tel: 902-634-9977 Email: info@coastalaction.org Web: www.coastalaction.org
June 17th, 2022
Municipality of Chester
151 King Street
Chester, NS
B0J 1J0
SUBJECT: Proposal for Water Quality Monitoring at Stanford Lake.
The following presents Coastal Action’s proposed scope of work, project schedule, deliverables, and cost for
services for the implementation of a water quality monitoring program at Stanford Lake.
SCOPE OF WORK
MOC has requested that Coastal Action develop a small-scall, 1-year water quality monitoring program for
Standford Lake. In subsequent years, this lake may be included in a larger initiative to monitor the general water
quality of several lakes within the Municipality of Chester.
Construction has started on a residential development project along the northern shore of the lake, creating
concerns about water quality impacts. Stanford Lake has one inlet on the northeast section of the lake that flows
from Lily Pond and Spectacle Lake. The lake’s outlet is located at the southernmost point of the lake, draining
south-west, under Hwy 3, and into Mill Cove.
Coastal Action is proposing a monthly sampling program, run from June to September 2022 . Parameters would
include E. coli, total phosphorous, total nitrogen, total suspended solids, and chlorophyll-α. Additionally, in-situ
parameters will be assessed using a YSI ProDSS probe (i.e., water temperature, pH, dissolved oxygen, total
dissolved solids, chlorophyll-α, and phycocyanin). A single sediment sample, collected from the deepest section
of the lake will be assessed for a full suite of metals. Finally, a sample will be taken at the inlet and outlet following
a period of heavy rain.
This program will provide a general review of current water quality conditions of the lake, with specific objectives
including 1) monitoring E. coli levels in the area to determine if bacteria contamination is an issue and 2)
evaluating the nutrient levels of the lake, and other parameters to determine the Trophic State Index of the lake.
This will provide information as to the general health of the waterbody and how prone the lake is to algae blooms.
A program of this scale will not be capable of identifying sources of bacteria; however, if results do indicate an
ongoing problem, a recommendation would be made for the implementation of a more comprehensive
monitoring program, as well as an investigation into potential sources (i.e., sewage effluent, waterfowl/wildlife,
seasonal properties, bottom sediments). If algae blooms are detected during sampling, NSE would be contacted
for investigation, and residents would be informed of the proper precautions.
45 School Street, Suite 403, PO Box 489, Mahone Bay, NS, B0J 2E0
Tel: 902-634-9977 Email: info@coastalaction.org Web: www.coastalaction.org
PROJECT SCHEDULE
Water quality sampling would occur once a month from June to September, collected from a single site in the
deepest part of the lake, at the northern inlet, and the southern outlet. A sediment sample will be taken from
the deepest point in the lake during the September samples, and a rainfall sample will be taken at the inlet and
outlet sites in late summer following 24 hours of >25 mm of rain. Samples will be collected in a small boat by a
crew of two individuals. Samples will be delivered to Bureau Veritas Labs in Bedford, NS.
DELIVERABLES
• Coastal Action would provide MOC staff with updates throughout the monitoring period to keep them
informed of occurrences of algal blooms and any exceedances of Health Canada guidelines for bacteria,
which pose a risk to water recreation.
• Coastal Action would provide MOC with a brief report summarizing the water quality results collected
from June to September 2022. Recommendations for future monitoring, landowner education,
preventative measures, etc., would be provided as well.
COST FOR SERVICES
Table 1. Proposed Budget for 2022 Stanford Lake Water Quality Monitoring Program.
Expenditure Cost Breakdown Total Cost
Lake Sampling
- Monthly from June to
September
Lake Site
$213.10/site x 4 months = $852.40
QA/QC:
$213.10/replicate + $213.10/blank x 1 month = $426.20
$1,278.60
Stream Sampling
-Monthly from June to
September
Inlet & Outlet Sites
$213.10/site x 2 sites x 4 months = $1,704.80
$1,704.80
Sediment Sampling
- Early September
Lake Site
$156.20/ site x 1 sites = $156.20
$154.70
Rainfall Sampling
- TBD
Inlet & Outlet Sites
$213.10/site x 2 sites = $426.20
$426.20
Coastal Action Services Monthly Sampling: $350/person x 2 people x 4 days = $2,800.00
Rainfall Sampling: $350/person x 2 people x 1 day = $700.00
Project Management: $400/day x 5 days = $2,000.00
$5,500.00
Mileage Site Travel 60 km x 5 @ $0.60 km = $180.00
Sample Drop off 150 km x 5 @ $0.60 km =$450.00
$630.00
Water Quality Report $400/day x 4 days $1,600.00
Sub-total $11,294.30
15% HST (HST #: 14067 2106 RT 0001) $1,694.15
Total $12,988.45
45 School Street, Suite 403, PO Box 489, Mahone Bay, NS, B0J 2E0
Tel: 902-634-9977 Email: info@coastalaction.org Web: www.coastalaction.org
1
Pam Myra (she/her)
From:Tara Maguire
Sent:July 11, 2022 10:00 AM
To:Pam Myra (she/her)
Subject:Fwd: #External: Fwd: Fleet Road -
TARA MAGUIRE
Deputy CAO
Office: 902-275-4132
Cell: 902-277-2273
Consider the environment. Do you really need to print this email?
Begin forwarded message:
From: Andre Veinotte <aveinotte@chester.ca>
Date: July 11, 2022 at 8:33:34 AM ADT
To: Tara Maguire <tmaguire@chester.ca>
Subject: FW: #External: Fwd: Fleet Road -
ANDRE VEINOTTE
District #1
Consider the environment. Do you really need to print this email?
From: suzanne marineau
Sent: July 8, 2022 4:50 PM
To: Andre Veinotte <aveinotte@chester.ca>
Subject: Re: #External: Fwd: Fleet Road -
Much appreciated
Suzanne Marineau
On Jul 8, 2022, at 4:16 PM, Andre Veinotte <aveinotte@chester.ca> wrote:
Thanks for the info. I'll follow up.
2
Andre
Sent from my Galaxy
-------- Original message --------
From: suzanne marineau
Date: 2022-07-08 3:48 p.m. (GMT-04:00)
To: Andre Veinotte <aveinotte@chester.ca>
Subject: #External: Fwd: Fleet Road -
Good afternoon, Andre:
Further to our conversation of a few months ago, please see email below.
Today, I delivered to the MLA a petition to address the condition of Fleet Road signed
by the residents of Fleet Road and Endeavor Ave.
In the meantime anything that you can do will be appreciated.
Thank you, Suzanne
Suzanne Marineau
Begin forwarded message:
From: suzanne marineau
Date: July 8, 2022 at 3:37:33 PM ADT
To: DPW-OCC@novascotia.ca
Subject: Fleet Road -
Please be advised that Fleet Road, East River is in such poor condition
that a regular car can not safely maneuver around the pot-holes. This is
becoming a very real issue.
Please advise how this will be resolved.
Thank you,
This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recogize
the sender and know the content is safe.
3
Suzanne Marineau