Miles Street East back on top of Thunder Bay's list for temporary shelter village site

A Thunder Bay city councillor is expecting an "interesting debate" on Monday as council once again considers a city-owned lot on Miles Street East as the site for a proposed temporary shelter village.

The site, at 114 Miles Street East, was previously considered by council in the fall. At the time, it was voted down.

It was one of many twists and turns in the temporary shelter village saga. Council has debated several sites across the city, before finally deciding on Kam River Heritage Park as the spot.

However, that decision was rescinded over safety concerns — the spot is bordered by the Kaministiquia River and a rail yard — and councillors directed administration to come back with a new recommendation, which turned out to be Miles Street East again.

Councillors are expected to debate and vote on the latest recommendation on Monday.

"I think it's important to recognize that a lot of due diligence has been done," Coun. Brian Hamilton, who represents the McKellar Ward (the ward includes the Miles Street site), said at a city media conference on Wednesday.

"We've looked at multiple sites, dozens and dozens of sites," he said. "It's going to be an interesting debate Monday night. But ultimately this meets all the hallmarks of a great site."

Hamilton was one of the councillors who voted against the site last fall. However, he's since changed his view.

"Truthfully, I didn't think the site was big enough," he said. "Now we actually own a piece of property adjacent to the site, which will actually increase our chances of building a site were people are going to want to live."

Cost-effective location

"That's going to create that good quality of life and dignity that I'm looking for."

The Miles Street East site would include 80 sleeping cabins, said Rilee Willianen, the city's encampment response lead.

"It's the most cost-effective of the options," she said. "It's the closest to services. There's over 14 services, supportive services that people who are experiencing homelessness are known to access in the area."

The site, the city said, is also accessible by emergency services, and ready for construction.

"There's a transit hub nearby. All those things lend to the success of the people living in the area."

Westfort Coun. Kristen Oliver supported the Miles Street location in the first vote.

"I know there are some members of council that didn't support it last time that are seriously looking at it this time, recognizing that we did also purchase the property adjacent to it," she said. "So there is room for expansion."

"We can do a phased-in approach, which I think will certainly help members of council that maybe struggled with it the first time around, that it would have been too crowded or too much on a small parcel of land."

There is a time constraint, however. In a media release, the city said constructing the village on Miles Street East would cost $4-4.5 million, which is below the $5 million the city has budgeted.

The city has also budgeted $1.5 million a year in operating costs.

If the city meets certain timelines with construction and occupancy, however, it would be eligible for $2.8 million in provincial funding. The release states at least 40 units would need to be ready by Dec. 15, and the remaining units by Feb. 27, 2026.

Requests for proposal have been issued for the construction and operation of the village.

"From my understanding, the funding will still be secured provided we choose a location by July 31 and get construction going," Oliver said. "We've been looking at this now for over a year."

"I'm pretty confident that if the decision is made on Monday that we will adhere to the provinces requirements on that."

If the site is approved on Monday, council would be in a position to ratify it at its meeting on July 21.

Council does not have any other meetings scheduled for July.

"This has not been an easy issue for anyone," Hamilton said. "Businesses, residents, there's a lot of frustration."

"But I think a lot of it is also coming from a misunderstanding," he said. "As councillors, we don't have that luxury. We have to be able to be at the ground level, but we also have to have the 40,000-foot view."

"We're looking at homelessness today as it is today. What's it going to be tomorrow? We already have reports across our desk and we don't have the luxury to ignore them. Association and Municipalities of Ontario put in a report only in January talking about the trajectory of homelessness and it is going to increase. And this is what was even before the trade war and all the economic realities that we're facing."

Leading up to the fall vote, the Fort William Business Improvement Area (BIA) expressed opposition to the location.

Willianen said the city met with the BIA board earlier this week.

MP opposed

"We provided an update on the project, listened to their concerns and we are committed to working with them to make sure this is a positive addition to the neighborhood," she said.

Monday's resolution, in fact, includes "providing $125,000 annually to the Fort William BIA for the duration of the project."

That funding, the resolution states, would go toward revitalization efforts, and addressing concerns related to security and cleanliness.

Tony Di Paolo, vice-chair of the BIA, said the opposition came because putting the temporary shelter village in the south core conflicts with efforts to revitalize the area.

"The two cores, north and south cores, used to be two-thirds of the tax base of the city," he said. "They're trying to revitalize."

"It's a direct contradiction of what they're trying to do."

He said the BIA is current polling its membership about the Miles Street Site.

"Time has passed and we want to make sure that we're advocating properly for our membership," he said. "So we're getting that information at the moment."

"Once we know that, we're going to go in the direction they're mandating us."

There is opposition, however, from Thunder Bay-Rainy River MP Marcus Powlowski, who's riding includes the proposed site, who said he will "vigorously oppose" any federal funding for the village if it's built on Miles Street.

"I am disappointed to hear that Thunder Bay City Council is once again considering the Miles Street location for the planned temporary shelter village," he said in a statement issued Wednesday. "Back in November, when it was first being considered, I stated my unequivocal opposition to the site. Nothing has changed since then to make me reconsider my position."

Powlowski said the village should not be located in the south core, due to potential effects on the area's residents and businesses.

"I would like to reiterate that I am supportive of housing solutions for our vulnerable populations, and I
have proposed several locations which would be better suited for such a project."

Similar projects pose challenges

Thunder Bay isn't the only municipality in Ontario that's faced challenges in developing a temporary shelter village.

Timmins, for example, has a site selected for its own, similar project.

In May, the Cochrane District Services Board issued two requests for proposal relating to the project, known as the HOPE (Housing, Outreach, Protection and Engagement) initiative: one for the construction, and one for the operation.

While bids were received for the construction of the 40-bed complex, none were received for the operational side, Timmins Today reported in June.

"Right now we're at a bit of a standstill," Timmins Ward 3 Coun. Bill Gvozdanovic said in an interview with CBC News on Wednesday. "I think the government understands that we're going to need a little bit of time to try to figure this out, because it's not as easy as people think it is."

Gvozdanovic said Timmins picked the site — on a municipally-owned piece of land on Pine Street South — with direct input from residents.

"We picked out four pieces of property that we owned, and then we put out a survey to the public," he said. "The public picked the spot that was furthest from any kind of residential."

"I give the public credit here in Timmins," Gvozdanovic said. "They understand that we need to help people, but we also have to live here too, and any kind of decisions should not impact our residential areas."

Timmins did not consider developing the project on private property, he said.

Regarding the lack of interest from operators, Gvozdanovic said "it may go back to the fact that we were refused for a HART (Homeless and Addiction Recovery Treatment) Hub by the province."

"There may be some pushback," he said. "I think the most important thing here is, we applied for funding from the government and we received the funding."

"Now if we turn around and throw our hands up in the air and say, 'well, no, we can't, we can't accept the funding,' that's not a good message to send to the government, because a lot of other municipalities applied for funding and weren't approved."

"We gotta find a way to make this work."

Oliver said while councillors don't get involved in discussions involving the issuing of municipal tenders, she's heard there is interest among local service providers in bidding on the operational RFP for the shelter village.

"I'm not involved in any of these discussions at that level so that I don't have any influence," she said. "But I do understand that there was some interest locally in running the temporary village."