ATV by-law fails

Dinli450_Straßenkurve_Quadjournal

Despite agreeing in principle to some changes to an off-road vehicle by-law in Chatham-Kent, council voted down the by-law on Monday night.

Council was deadlocked 9-9 on the issue during their regular meeting, which caused the motion to fail.

The by-law was set to include all of Chatham-Kent, excluding the Chatham city limits, and would have been for a trial period of one year before being re-evaluated.

John Norton, the director of legal services for Chatham-Kent, said enacting the new by-law could affect the Municipalities insurance rates.

“We have consulted with our insurance company and they are not recommending this bylaw,” he said. “They are not going to increase our premium if we pass the by-law but if we have accidents or lawsuits… obviously our claims history would become poor and our insurance premium could go up.”

East Kent Coun. Steve Pinsonneault, who brought forward the original motion, saw this as a great opportunity for the community.

“Here we have a great opportunity for the communities at very little cost,” he said. “If ATV’s are trespassing onto farmers properties that is unfortunate, however they are doing that without a bylaw now. With that being said, I think we do need to strengthen our trespassing laws. We have to make it a deterrent to go on the properties.”

Pinsonneault said he didn’t see any problems with other issues being raised.

“Shoulder damages by ATV’s would be so minimal there would be more damage done by tractors with four sets of dual on them that are so wide they have to get onto the shoulders,” he said. “They are going to do more damage than ATV’s ever do.”

He added: “ATV’s run a reduced speed and have to yield to the farm equipment so I don’t see that as being and issue either. Snowmobiles are allowed on the streets as of right now with no restrictions. They run and there is no problems with them.”

Wallaceburg’s councillors Jeff Wesley and Carmen McGregor were both supportive of implementing the by-law.

“I think leading the way and maybe having the opportunity to address some of the issues that are out there and maybe look at proper licensing,” McGregor said. “Some of the people who are selling these and helmets etc., there might be an increase in sales to them which is always good for people in the community. I would like to at least give it a try.”

Wesley added: I think sometimes we get in our mindset where we think about why we cannot do things as opposed to thinking about how we can do things. The thing that is a saving grace for me… it is a trial period. We already allow snowmobiles, we already allow boats in our waterways and rivers and bays. The vast majority are responsible owners, drivers considerate and safe and I think for a trial period for one year we can give the off-road vehicles the opportunity to show us that they are responsible.”

Chatham Coun. Derek Robertson said he couldn’t support the by-law, as the evaluation criteria for the trial period is non-existent.

“Safety obviously needs to be a paramount concern,” he said. “We have heard about the tourism element. We haven’t heard what the economic impact is. I would be interested in knowing what the economic impact from a revenue perspective in Chatham-Kent is.”

Robertson added: “If in a year from now we are taking a look as to whether or not we go or not go, I think that needs to be a part of it. I would like to see is that we didn’t talk about what the evaluation criteria would be. I think we all know that we manage what we measure but we don’t know what the measurements are going to be. We are going to review and evaluate it in a year but again who knows what the evaluation is going to be like.”

Some local farmers provided deputations prior to the issue being discussed in open council on Monday.

“Currently no official ATV or off-road facilities exist in Chatham-Kent and none are planned or being developed,” said Ron Faubert, president of the Kent Federation of Agriculture. “Farmland, woodlots, conservation areas, wetlands and private propriety will become the irresistible playground for off-road motor vehicles if this takes place.

Faubert added: “Farmers and property owners are very concerned with liability issues, property distraction, injury or death while trespassing as should council, due to the hazards on municipal road allowances.”

Louis Roesch, director of Zone 1 for the Ontario Federation of Agriculture, said he was concerned about potential accidents.

“Making left turns on our farm entrances is always done with extreme caution because of oncoming or passing traffic,” he said. “We have never had to give serious thought to vehicles passing us on the right shoulder of the road.”

Roesch added: “ATV’s can travel at three to four times the speed of some of our machines. The legal length of the tractor means it must travel totally on the road surface making the right turn into an unmarked lane way, we would have no chance for farm operators or ATV drivers to avoid an accident if the ATV driver is already taking over the lane.”


– Photo credit: Stefan Herbst

5 COMMENTS

  1. As to Mr Roesch,s thoughts a
    you say at this pint you have no worries and being passed on the right while making a turn, that is just luck you haven’t , passing on the right is not illegal so any vehicle could at any time no just ATV owners cars can to they just haven’t. As For most ATV owners no it is illegal to tresspass and do ask permission to go on property. will there be some to break the law sure as there is with snowmobiles , and hunters . A one year trial is warranted. the proof is not in councils thoughts on it it is in the ATV owners to prove to you, give them a chance.. .

  2. I think it is un fair to make me have insurance and a plate on my atv. While people can ride an E bike free. And cause obstruction to traffic. I really would have enjoyed using my atv. I think you need to be reasonable and give this a try.

  3. I agree with responses Chathamkent bears no liability for my A.T.V as I carry full insurance coverage the same as for my personal vehicles .Tax payers have wasted three million dollars on railroad bed that could be used as A.T.V trail. E bikes, Scooters and Snowmobiles with no insurance are travelling the roads .There are a lot of responsible A.T.V riders in Chathamkent. Give us a fair chance.

  4. I agree with Richard Ebikes are the real hazard. They don’t even wear proper helmets and don’t follow the rules of the road.
    If the city is so concerned with insurance ban those things….

  5. The argument against this one year trial is weak. These are small minded people not seeing the big picture. Insurance policy of the ATV is covered by the owner, no different than an automobile owners requirement of registering and insuring at the very minimum liability for use of a car on the road. Whether the insurance or individual goes after the town should be of no more concern than what the current situation is regarding legal suits, frivolous or otherwise. Very disappointing. Allow ebikes, no insurance, and not allow ATV, registered and insured. Ya, you guys on council are a real bunch of wizards. To the 9 who supported the motion, my hat is off to you. To the archaic and absurd thought processes shared by the other nine…get bent.

Comments are closed.

- Advertisment -