Tag Archives: roy brown park

Photos of Roy Brown Park — Mark Smith

Photos of Roy Brown Park — Mark Smith
Please play while viewing

I love these fungi mushrooms and when Mark said he had seen some at Roy Brown Park I asked him to photograph them. Humour me please. 🙂 Roy Brown Park is located behind the MVCA office and is owned and maintained by the Town of Carleton Place. It currently features 0.5km of well-groomed walking trails and an off-leash dog park.

All photos from Mark Smith with thanks

All photos from Mark Smith with thanks

October 13th 2021

Last night our council passed a bylaw for tree conservation. Very Very proud

Read more about the fungi here..

Oddities — Lanark County Puffball Mushrooms

Beware of the Lanark County Fairy Rings
The Faeries of McArthur Island- Dedicated to the Bagg Children

Read more about parks here.

1963 Riverside Park — Stills from a 8 MM Movie Camera — Larry Clark

Riverside Park Comments Larry Clark ‘The Dip’

St. Mary’s and Riverside Park 1969

What Justin Bieber is Missing by Not Coming to Carleton Place

When Were Some of the Trees Planted in Riverside Park?

The Carleton Place Riverside Park Booth Etc. Etc.

The Secret Sanctuary of a Carleton Place Neighbourhood

The Mysterious Shoe Trees

Let’s Build Cabins at Riverside Park!

When the Circus came to Carleton Place

Tug of War 1970’s Riverside and Centennial Park Carleton Place

Just Beat It! Carnival Riot in Carleton Place at Riverside Park

Before and After at Centennial Park

So What Did You Do in Riverside Park?

It was the Boathouse that Went On and On

The Carleton Place Riverside Park Booth Etc. Etc.

So What is Up With Roy Brown Park?

So What is Up With Roy Brown Park?


Photo-InsideOttawaValley.com 2015

First trail in Roy Brown Park officially open

Rob Probert posted this November 14th, 2017 


Roy Watson asked:

Rob – query about Roy Brown Park. is publicity on the back burner? Has the park been officially opened? Seems it was skipped on 1 July? I walk/bike along there and it is a great route, the dog park is getting minimal use though but I see the additional route along the river is almost completed. So my query is, why isn’t this park part of Remembrance Ceremonies.

There are remembrance plaques for Passendale and Vimy which are constantly in the news. Maybe we should consider at least wreath laying at these plaques and given that they are within walking distance of the CPHS, three public schools and the Navy League (Sea Cadets) surprised they cannot incorporate visits to this park. I would think that local sea cadets could visit and provide wreaths during this period or for that matter air force cadets from Smiths Falls (i.e., Roy Brown WW1). Perhaps a little late this year but consideration for future ceremonies.

So, what is going on with Roy Brown park and why are so few of us enjoying it???? Of note; during the last open house I went to the Moore house and asked about the official opening and the person on the desk didn’t even know there was a park or where it was. I had to point it out on the map ! Roy Watson


Rob Probert replies: 

These are all good points raised by Roy. Neither I, nor the Roy Brown Society are in charge of this project but I think I can provide some useful info.

The original formal opening was scheduled for July 1st. That day was a complete washout, as was much of the summer. Invited guests were present and it was unfortunate. I do believe that the parks and rec staff who are in charge of this park and the development decided that they may as well try to complete the rest of the trail development scheduled for this year. I know the conversation of another formal opening has been discussed and perhaps an opportunity was in fact lost in this Nov. 11.
It could have been a suitable date. Unfortunately none of the Roy Brown family were available and work has still been ongoing.  In any case, on behalf of the Roy Brown Society, I did, along with the town’s parks dept. and the staff of Carleton Place and Beckwith Heritage Museum collaborate to name the trails and come up with the images and wording on the entrance pavilions’ info panels. I do agree that publicity and constant information should be developed.

I have some other simple ideas that I think would make the historical part of the park resonate. These ideas are not yet presented so I won’t go into detail now. I think the suggestions of a wreath laying at this time of year is a great suggestion, especially as more people begin to use the park.

The Roy Brown Society is somewhat focused at the moment on a project to build a commemorative statue of Roy Brown. It will be paced beside the Moore House. There is already close to $75,000.00 in cash and supporting services committed to the project and about another $100,000.00 needed.

As to the staff at the Moore House visitor center I can’t comment specifically but will reach out to make sure that they are better informed.

I hope this helps a bit with your thought, Again all good points and ideas.

Carleton Place? What if You or I did This?


Yup, here she goes again some are saying, and you know what? I don’t blame you.

But, someone has to care what is going on here at the end of Lake Ave West– without the approval of County Council. Please attend the next council meeting on–Tuesday, September 20, 2016 Council Chambers at 7:00 p.m if you do and voice your opinion to your councillor. If this was me or you who caused this–would we be put somewhere without a key.

Do we need a bloated development like this new one  in Carleton Place at the end of Lake Ave West? Do we need to put a stormwater management pond on our town-owned parkland–Roy Brown Park? The “Bodnar Project” will add close to 600 new homes and cars.

 Pre-construction has already destroyed the wildlife corridor and eco system– and nothing has been built yet. This is inexcusable – it’s the proverbial biting the hand that feeds us.

RECORDED VOTE for the stormwater management pond and the way this land looks– Mayor Antonakos Yea– Councillor Black Nay– Councillor Doucett Yea– Deputy-Mayor Flynn Yea– Councillor Fritz Nay– Councillor Redmond Yea –Councillor Trimble Nay

Mark Smith added:

I’ll bet there won’t be different flowers in bloom during the different seasons, or butterflies, bees, dragon flies, green frogs, grass snakes, the 2 species of Ground Nesting Sparrows will be gone as well as most of the ground feeding birds since there will be no insects left, and I’ll bet no Monarchs either since there is very very little left of the Milkweed. (tiny little patch off to the side in the lower meadow within the Natural Environment area)

Wonder where they are going to get the water to water the planted grasses or sod, after they lay it, from now on… and on and on and on…. since there is NO tree cover or any plans for any (non shown), it will be in a huge open field and exposed to the sun from early morning till late evening with the same grasses as in your lawn. Imagine what your lawn would look like exposed to the sun morn till night without any watering this past summer!


Excerpt  from Policy Review Committee – August 16th, 2016 – Page 5

THAT staff engage Stantec and Cavanagh Construction, on a time and material basis, to construct Phase 1 of Roy Brown Park so that the pavilions and signage can proceed.

Pictures of what it used to look like and the nature shots you will not
see again (all the Meadows except a tiny, small tight spot are GONE)

The work to be done by the Developer is a dog park, flat structure  and open grass area (Phase 1) Why it is being stripped of top soil I cannot understand.– Photos and text by Mark Smith








DSCF3114-long grass.JPG



The ground cover also destroyed/damaged in the Northern Meadow when putting
in the trails. It appears to me they just drove where ever they wanted
to without any consideration for the ground cover (very thin, on bedrock).- Photos and text by Mark Smith



No longer exists


No longer exists


They also destroyed 1 of the only 3 birch trees in the park (I believe)
and badly damaged another putting the trail through from the swamp
culvert (Gas line trail) to Boundary road–Photos and text by Mark Smith


How much more?

Related Reading:

This week in—Really Carleton Place? Really?

Oingo Boingo! Bobolink Birds Bothered- Concerns-Carleton Place Citizens #2

It’s Your Decision– Roy Brown Park

Want to see What Part of Roy Brown Park Looks like now?



unnamed (19).jpg

Submitted Photo

The entire North end of Roy Brown Park has been stripped from the MVCA building to edge of Boundary Rd.  Great looking trail folks!

As someone said: “I find it hard to swallow that the MVCA allowed all that area to be cleared the way it was.”


Take a look at Jackson Ridge and the storm water management pond that is the size of Belgium so to speak. Not that there is anything wrong with Belgium.

This week in—Really Carleton Place? Really?


Developer should build storm water management pond on own land-Rob Probert



Tuesday, August 16 Carleton Place Town Hall 7 pm–Please attend
Rob also sent me this– but you can also read it here and thank you Carleton Place Almonte Gazette for printing this.

It comes as no surprise that a development has been proposed for what we know as the Bodnar Lands at the west end of Lake Avenue, here in Carleton Place. These some 45 acres or so are clearly visible now that the developer has stripped the land.

It comes as no surprise that the developer’s initial plans calls for some 612 housing units in a variety of forms.It comes as no surprise that the town council has already agreed to take a cash-in lieu of actual parkland contribution from the developer.

It comes as no surprise then that the design has no parkland or playgrounds of any sort within the development. If you then look at the overall map of the town, you will see that there are no defined public green spaces nor playgrounds in the entire area west of Napoleon Street and south of Lake Avenue West, a huge area. The sole exception is a modest playground on the west edge of Westview Heights.

But wait, there is a surprise. Developers are required, by law, to create storm water waste management processes. In Carleton Place, the preferred method seems to be the creation of storm waste water management ponds. I prefer to call these “lagoons” as they are not fresh water recreation facilities. In any case, that is another story. Other towns have other less intrusive ways of handling this water.

The surprise here is the staff recommendation that the developer be allowed to build this “lagoon” on our parkland (in this case Roy Brown Park). At first, council seemed to accept this idea but in the June meeting another vote was held. The vote was 5-2 to not allow this private developer’s “lagoon” on our parkland. That seemed to be a very simple and clear message.

Lo and behold, yet again, a recommendation comes before council to allow this same “lagoon” on this same parkland, in a slightly different location. This recommendation comes before council in complete disregard for the vote just held. What gives?
The council is being dragged into the semantics of the function and quality of the “lagoon” when it should only be concerned with the issue of selling, trading or bartering public parkland for the benefit of a developer.

The developer should build this “lagoon” on their own land. Better yet, there are alternatives. The public is told that the pond will be attractive. If so, then all the more reason to build houses around it on the developer’s lands. Sounds like a premium pricing opportunity to me.

We are also told that the Roy Brown Park will in itself require a “lagoon” as future park development takes place
gee: a playing field and a paved parking lot and some nature trails. Why would a paved parking lot be required? Take away the pavement and that sounds a lot like the successful Brunton Park in Beckwith. It does not require a pond and is similar in size.

We absolutely need to be certain that storm waste water be as clean as possible when finally released to the Mississippi River, in this case a very short distance from our drinking water intake. The developer’s response when the 5-2 vote came down was, more or less, that if on their own property, they will build the “lagoon” wherever they like. In this case it will be as close to Lake Avenue as possible as it is the most convenient location. I thought we still had regulatory requirements. Do we?

So here we are. We continue to allow new neighbourhood development without internal green space, more importantly, community meeting spaces. The Brigil development is a good example of positive planning. It at least has a decent size playground right in the middle of the homes.

It may come as a surprise to some that this is not the only development moving forward in Carleton Place. Several thousand residences are in the planning stages. When developers have finished off and sold out their projects, they are gone. All future responsibility falls onto the municipality, that is to say all taxpayers. All future repairs and problems will require our tax dollars. The developer is gone. Sure, the upfront development charges are substantial but long used up 30 years out.

I have already heard the argument that building the “lagoon” on Roy Brown Park frees up land for the developer to build more houses which in turn generates more tax dollars. That is quite true. The problem is that the tax levy is not a profit generator for the town. In most cases, the town barely breaks even over the long term. Arena improvements, fire dept. upgrades, library upgrades, swim pool maintenance and the ongoing need for more of everything in the public domain has to be paid for. If the new developments don’t yield much revenue, why not at least make them as well planned as they can be?

By well-planned I mean with some open space, some family-friendly features, not just packed in residences with a few trees along an occasional so-called boulevard that planners are now calling a Linear Park. Give me a break!

Council already voted 5-2 no on this deal yet another vote is scheduled for Aug.16; a special meeting no less.

What gives?

Rob Probert
Carleton Place

Related reading

Right in Your Backyard Carleton Place!

Do read Janet McGuiness’s letter to the editor

It’s Your Decision– Roy Brown Park

Mark Smith has left a comment on CarletonPlace.com

I guess the Town has publicly issued its statement and it’s stance on the Roy Brown Park Storm Water Pond prior to committee/councils approval/denial even though it was soundly defeated last time by a 5-2 vote.


Stormwater Management and Roy Brown Park

 Brown Park.pdf


I was going to comment on this article here but nah it would be tooooooooo long.

Come on down next Tues (Council) and listen or make your own comment (pro/against). You should be able to register to speak.–MGJSmith

Right in Your Backyard Carleton Place!


Town meeting Tuesday night August 16th 7 pm.


Where is this? Right in your backyard! Do people really know what a Storm Water Management Pond is?

This particular Storm Water Drainage pond is in the subdivision (Stonewater Bay) off of McNeely between Shoppers Drug Mart and the Waterside Seniors Residence.  When it drains into the Mississippi River the water is disgusting and the algae has become a thick solid mass–and it smells.

Granted, we are having  drought this year and a higher water level might help the situation at the Storm Water Drainage pond at Stonewater Bay. In fact, the town of Carleton Place knows it has an issue and has to fix it.


Same view, where the pond empties into the river — one taken in May of this year and one taken in August.



Almonte uses in-ground mechanical devices to separate the toxins from the water- so why are we insisting on continuing to build these antiquated storm water management ponds. Is it because it is cheaper for the developer to build?

“The Town’s intention to use storm ponds in Roy Brown Park as part of the recreation capacity and parks will be built around them”. 

These are storm waste water management ponds of highly questionable function. They are not play grounds. The Carleton Place council voted no storm water management pond for the developer –and then the staff rejected it. Less than two months later it is back on the table. What?




Is this is what will become of Roy Brown Park and the shoreline above the boat launch at the end of Lake Avenue West? Do you want this?  Can we not implement other methods?

Town meeting Tuesday night August 16th 7 pm.

Do read Janet McGuiness’s letter to the editor

It’s Your Decision– Roy Brown Park

Mark Smith has left a comment on CarletonPlace.com

I guess the Town has publicly issued its statement and it’s stance on the Roy Brown Park Storm Water Pond prior to committee/councils approval/denial even though it was soundly defeated last time by a 5-2 vote.


Stormwater Management and Roy Brown Park

http://carletonplace… Brown Park.pdf


I was going to comment on this article here but nah it would be tooooooooo long.

Come on down next Tues (Council) and listen or make your own comment (pro/against). You should be able to register to speak.–MGJSmith






It’s Your Decision– Roy Brown Park


collageits my park.jpg

Janet sent me this letter and I was going to post it tonight.. but you can read it also in the Carleton Place Almonte Canadian Gazette— stay tuned for more!!

Reader: Taxpayers should be properly consulted on decisions involving Roy Brown Park


Carleton Place Almonte Canadian Gazette


Our municipal politicians are elected to office to serve town residents and act in our best interest. It is expected that they will put their interests aside as they work for the people of Carleton Place.

I expect council members to act with integrity, thoughtful consideration and good judgement as they make decisions that affect our community.

Being a member of a municipal council is often a difficult, thankless job and there can be many powerful influences that can cause a council to stray from its mandate to serve town residents.

Regrettably, on Aug. 16 our council will be put in the position of choosing to act in the interest of town residents or bowing to the strong influence of a developer.

On June 28, council voted 5-2 against a developer’s proposal to dump contaminated storm water into Roy Brown Park instead of the developer managing the storm water on its own property. Council voted down the original proposal because it is an inappropriate use of public parkland.

The issue should have died on June 28 with the defeated motion and the developer should have respected the decision of council.

However, there was no respect for council, its authority or its decision.

With no direction from council to do so, this proposal has been put back onto the Aug. 16 agenda. Why is council being forced to deal with this issue again? Because the developer wants it. The situation puts me in mind of a persistent teenager trying to wear down parents in order to get what it wants.

However, a flip-flop should be something that you wear on your feet. It should not describe the actions of your council.

As background, in 2004, $385,000 of taxpayers’ money bought land for a park and dedicated it to the memory of First World War flying Ace, Roy Brown.

The park is to have a dog park, tennis courts, playing field and a large recreation building as well as trails and picnic pavilions. A grant from Canada 150 will be used to place signs in the park with information provided by the Roy Brown Society and historical society.

On Aug. 16, council will once again have to review a plan from a developer to dump its contaminated storm water into the park. The people of Carleton Place have not been consulted, no part of the park has been declared surplus to the town’s parkland needs and the area needed to contain the water would be the part of the park that was to be used for the dog park, tennis courts and parking lot for the recreation building.

Why would council even consider removing public uses from public parkland and replace them with a holding area for polluted water and contaminated sediment from an adjacent development? After all, it is the duty of elected representatives to manage public lands in the public interest.

Town council voted against it once already. It is imperative that they vote against it again on Aug. 16.

Our tax dollars bought Roy Brown Park for parkland. We own it.

To use a popular Lanark County phrase “Back Off Government! This is our Land!”

Janet McGinnis

Carleton Place

Is it Just Me? Where are the Words “Drinking Water”? – Opinion

Going Once- Going Twice- Carleton Place Sold to the Highest Bidder?



On June 28, during a policy review committee meeting in Carleton Place, council members voted 5-2 against a shared storm water management pond in Roy Brown Park.  The Council votes no pond for the developer on park land and allegedly, staff seems to have rejected that vote.

At that June 28th Town Council meeting Mark Smith and  Jim McCready, a member of the River Corridor/Urban Forest Committee, expressed concern that the Town was permitting the developer who bought Bodner Park, to relocate a storm water management pond from their construction site to that of adjoining Roy Brown Park.

Speakers against the project implied that if it went ahead, the proposed storm water management pond would be built too close to our river and, if it overflows, go into the river which is upstream from our drinking water.  Interesting to learn that Almonte does not allow storm ponds. They have in-ground mechanical devices to separate yucky stuff from the water- my guess is ponds are cheaper to build.

It would be nice to say that we actually thought this issue about a storm pond in the Roy Brown Park was over. Now, it appears they are bringing it up again and we should just accept what is coming. Unfortunately, we really don’t know what is coming. To top that off, further in the agenda, you will also see about a proposed power plant to be built near the town hall.

Town staff are once again recommending  the Storm pond be located on Roy Brown Park. They have fiddled with the details and are suggesting a different location– but in reality, it’s the same nonsense. There is no notice where it is going- actually, there is little information. Basically, it is the same massive pond, just in a different physical location, nothing else has changed.

Mark Smith says it still does not follow the Provincial Recommendations (and everybody else)  of smaller connected trains of Storm Water Facilities which provide a better treatment of this * ‘sewage’ (yes that is how the Province defines it). Read the rest of Mark’s comments here.

There was also no motion of Council directing staff to refuse the developer’s request to locate on Roy Brown Park–only “comments from the public”.  If you read further down the Town of Carleton Place agenda there is another item that states that it is the Town’s intention to use storm ponds as part of the recreation capacity and parks will be built around them.

These are storm waste water management ponds of highly questionable function. They are not play grounds. It would be nice to say it’s time to move on, but unfortunately the reality is that residents of Carleton Place should continue to monitor this project and when needed, advocate for the environment.

How come we are now spending money to fix the one at Stonewater Bay? Why aren’t we waiting for the new pond regulations that are anticipated in September?

Is the subdivision design being shown on Tuesday even desirable? No green space, but the trees along the sidewalk will count as the required greenery. No in-neighbourhood playground. Just packed in houses..

I don’t think we can just sit back and let the “powers to be” do what they want–that kind of attitude leads to the whole disregard for the community to serve a few corporate interests. I am still astounded by the lack of transparency throughout this process and the lack of respect for our conservation.

A mere 38 days after the last attempt to build the pond in Roy Brown Park was defeated by Council, this new committee meeting seems to be timed to get the least amount of public input. Normally, as stated on the town’s own website, the Policy Review Committee meets on the 2nd and 4th Tuesday of each month, yet this time, when a controversial topic is on the agenda that brought out an overflow crowd to the Council meeting on June 28th, they move it to the first Tuesday of the month. Coincidentally, it’s also the day immediately following a long holiday weekend. It seems the town of Carleton Place is bound and determined to use that parkland.

Is the subdivision design being shown on Tuesday even desirable? No green space, but the trees along the sidewalk will count as the required greenery. No in neighbourhood playground. Just packed in houses.  Are we going to give in like Almonte seems to be caving into Enerdu— or do we have a choice?

Come on out to the meeting on Tuesday  at the town hall and let the town know that we are not for sale and need to protect our local environment.

Policy Review Committee Agenda for the August 2nd, 2016 meeting to be held in the Council Chambers at 7:00 p.m

*If you search for sewage (after the Index) it is the 4th one“sewage” includes drainage, storm water, commercial wastes and industrial wastes and such other matter or substance as is specified by the regulations; (“eaux d’égout”)

and while we are on it..


Related reading

The Constipation Blues in Carleton Place




*If you search for sewage (after the Index) it is the 4th one“sewage” includes drainage, storm water, commercial wastes and industrial wastes and such other matter or substance as is specified by the regulations; (“eaux d’égout”)


Related reading

The Constipation Blues in Carleton Place



Carleton Place council votes against shared storm water management pond in Roy Brown Park

Carleton Place resident asks council to reconsider Roy Brown Park use

Is This What You Want Carleton Place?

Are we in Neverland? Concerns from Carleton Place Citizens #1

Bears and Foxes Seen in the Carleton Place Appleton Almonte Area

Oingo Boingo! Bobolink Birds Bothered- Concerns-Carleton Place Citizens #2

Is it Just Me? Where are the Words “Drinking Water”? – Opinion



As you know the Storm Water Management Pond in Roy Brown Park was turned down June 28 with only two voting Yay. The Storm Water Management Pond will now be built on the developer’s property.

In this week’s Carleton Place -Almonte Gazette there was a write up of the June 28th’s proceedings.

“Carleton Place council votes against shared storm water management pond in Roy Brown Park”

I had a few people email me to share their opinion wondering if the article possibly sounded one-sided. Everyone in my world can voice their opinion- that is how the world turns in my life, and our local paper opinion’s are noted and appreciated. But, personally, I feel the black and white words “drinking water” were sadly omitted throughout the whole article. Contaminated drinking water was the main concern of the opposing side.

To be fair, there was one lone paragraph in the newspaper article that said:

“Their main concern was the pond’s closeness to the Mississippi River and the town’s water intake”.

Now correct me if I am wrong, but people really have to think hard after that sentence to make the connection to the words “drinking water”. Maybe I am right out to lunch with this one, but to be fair, I did ask a dozen people what they thought about it.

However, the vote was in- the pond is not going in-for now– but I am going to put Jim McCready R.P.F., the Chair of the Carleton Place Urban Forest/River Corridor Advisory Committee’s opinions below to remind everyone why that pond should never go in. To quote a wise man on carletonplace.com:

“It seems no matter how good we can have this grain of life on this rock we call a planet we do everything in our power to screw it up, destroy it or keep it to ourselves”.

Thank you to all who voted to keep this pond out of Roy Brown Park.



I think CP’ers do equate water intake with drinking water but also that most would have dismissed any development news as just one more development and left it at that. This scenario flew under the radar … and maybe we need shoutier  (Sara Palinism?) words from Town council. Chance-Carletonplace.com



Carleton Place

Urban Forest / River Corridor

Advisory Committee

175 Bridge Street
Carleton Place
Ontario  K7C 2V8
tel      1-613-257-6202
fax     1-613-257-8170
email  jdmccready@bell.net


June 20, 2016


To: Town Council


Subject: Development Permit Application Sub4-01-2016 (Bodnar Lands)


The Carleton Place Urban Forest /River Corridor Advisory Committee has reviewed the above Application and as a Committee of Council have the following comments.


It has always been understood that enhanced storm water management ponds must be installed when development of the Bodnar properties was undertaken to protect the town’s water supply and the intake down stream from these sites. It is imperative to protect the town’s water supply now and for generations to come.


The current Conceptual Proposal to Council has the Storm Water Management Pond (SWMP) extremely close to the river, which the committee is recommending rejecting for the following reasons:


1.    The original Conceptual Plan for Roy Brown Park put forth by MVCA and the Town had the storm water management pond well back from the river and on the developer’s property, which the committee supported at that time in 2014 and still does today.  Map 1 with the addition of the proposed SWMP in red


2.    As it stands now the SWMP would be in or very close to IPZ9 and would be governed by the prescribed instrument as follows.” Storm Water Management Planning and Design Manual MOE 2003. In IPZ 9 to8, the risks posed by storm water management facilities are to be managed through the Environmental Compliance Approval process under the Ontario Water Resources Act.” Municipal public works staff consulted as part of the policy development favoured including the recommendation that future storm water management facilities be built to Enhance Level Protection Standards. As stated by the committee Enhanced Standards would include well back from the river.


3.    The present location on the conceptual plan leaves very little room to adjust to a catastrophic failure affecting the Town’s drinking water. As part of an enhanced SWMP a location further back in the park laid out in the original plan for Roy Brown Park with an outlet through the wetland, as a buffer, would give greater protection to the town’s water supply. Map 1


4.    The flood plan line is extremely close to where the proposed SWMP is to go. This is extremely close if a catastrophe were to happen or if guidelines were to change in the future due to climate change or other factors such as extreme storms such as we have been experiencing in the last number of years. Map 1 & Map2





5.    The committee is of the opinion that it is premature to propose one large SWMP for all possible development in and/ or adjacent to Roy Brown Park when no such plans have been prepared and storm water needs have not been determined. The committee suggests pursuing the idea of two separate SWMP options: One for the residential developer on their land as previously laid out; one for the commercial property yet to be decided; and possibly  one on public lands depending on how the property is developed. This will give you options if one SWMP should fail.


6.    We have not had good experiences with SWMP close to the River. The Mississippi Quays SWMP is a case in point. We should not be putting the town’s drinking water in jeopardy in such situations.



We are prepared to discuss this with you at your convenience.


 Jim McCready R.P.F.


Carleton Place Urban Forest/River Corridor Advisory Committee.






And in this Corner—It’s been a Week I Tell You!


collagefix it.jpg



A small town in Saskatchewan is trying to save one of its grain elevators from meeting the wrecking ball. Many small towns in Canada are still fighting the Nestle Water Bottling Co. A local reporter posts on Facebook that journalists often need to ask difficult questions and it is not a sign of disrespect—they are simply doing their job. 


This week a Storm Water Management Pond in Roy Brown Park was turned down in Carleton Place and will now be built on the developer’s property. Both sides have different views and are passionate about their beliefs. Conservationists have said they haven’t had good experiences with a SWMP close to the Mississippi River. The  conservationist mentioned the Mississippi Quays SWMP as a case in point, and how we should not be putting the town’s drinking water in jeopardy in such situations. But the other side disagrees, and if a community centre was ever built in Roy Brown Park a SWMP would probably have to be built on said property. So who wins?


Then there was a ruckus in the Almonte Council Chambers this week. The disagreement was all about downtown public lands being declared as a heritage district. Just like Carleton Place, one side is for it, and the other side argues because of their beliefs.  By the way, this same fight happened in Carleton Place 8 years ago. Did the Almonte mayor’s allegedly unruly action affect his future? What happens next?


So what do we do when both sides believe they are right?


Small towns and rural communities are looking for ways to strengthen their economies, provide better quality of life, and build on local assets. Many rural communities and small towns are facing challenges, including rapid growth at metropolitan edges, declining rural populations, and loss of farms and working lands.


For the population, there are things we just don’t see anymore, and there are other things that stick out because they bother you–because you know how they got that way, and you don’t want it to happen again.


Do we all pull our chairs up together?

Do we get on the same side of the problem, and all work together?

Do we continue to let our differences consume us?

How do we fix this?
We really need to sort things out together- because it will continue forever– and as Lenny Bruce once said– once you’ve seen the cannon in the park there’s nothing else to do.