Big Bay Point: Public Land to a Private Developer?

Jun
13
2012
Putting public land in private hands rubs people the wrong way, especially if they have reason to mistrust the private hands.

For years, Lake Simcoe residents from Big Bay Point and Environmental Defence have been fighting a proposed mega-marina resort development in their community. Now, the focus is on a controversial sale or lease of public shoreline land, to a developer with a history of suing its opposition.

Putting public (or Crown) land in private hands is a process that should be open to broad public comment. But Ministry of Natural Resources staff tell us that only those with lands abutting these Crown lands are eligible to lease or buy the lands from the Crown. Only people within 100 shoreline meters of the public land in question were given an opportunity to comment. The limited opportunity for public input led us to create a video and a petition to gather opposition to the land sale.
 

 
The developer, Kimvar, a subsidiary of Geranium, plans to build a 1000 slip marina on Lake Simcoe which is already suffering from water and noise pollution. It has conditional approval to build 2,000 units—mostly limited occupancy, and a 400-unit hotel—in what is now a small, heritage cottage community at the north end of Innisfil, Ontario.
 
To build the marina entrance’s breakwaters and to fortify almost 200 meters of the entrance with rock and concrete, the developer needs to acquire two pieces of publicly owned land adjacent to the marina entrance. But opponents don’t think this developer deserves the public’s land, especially after it has launched multiple, expensive lawsuits (SLAPP) against local residents who object.
 
Environmental Defence and the Innisfil District Association want to stop the land sale, and allow local residents a fair opportunity to comment on it. If the province is entertaining the sale of public land, it should be a public sale, they argue, not a sole-source agreement.
 
This is particularly important in light of the chilling effect SLAPPs had on public participation. Many people were unwilling to come forward to oppose this development. Now that the province is dealing with the distribution of public lands, it’s an ideal time for the public to have a say. 
 
Learn more about how the Big Bay Point development is bad for the lake.
 
And sign the petition to keep public lands in public hands.

Comments

We would love to hear from you - leave a comment below, or reply to a previous comment. We have a comments policy
Environmental Defence does not endorse any of the views posted in the comments section. By submitting your comments, you acknowledge that Environmental Defence has the right to reproduce, broadcast and publicize those comments or any part thereof in any manner whatsoever. Please note that comments are pre-moderated/reviewed and published according to our submission guidelines. Comments that use discriminatory, partisan or inappropriate language will not be published. Comments that advertise a product or service will not be published.
that you should know about.
leave a comment
Your email will NOT be shown on the website.
Enter your website, blog, Facebook or Twitter URL. It will be linked from the comment.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.
Jun
21
2012

Big Bay Point: Public Land to a private developer?


Yvonne Hiemstra says:

So let me get this straight......while the rest of the world endeavors to protect land from development through the creation of parks and reserves, the Ontario Govt is thinking of selling land to a private developer? Hello??
This goes against every environmentally responsible goal from Environmental Defence to The Nature Conservancy to CPAW to Greenpeace to WWF and on and on. Once this land is sold, you will NEVER get it back and think of all the destruction of habitat that this developer will embark on if given the chance. This developer looks like a loose cannon who will do anything to get his way. It is opening a can of worms.
I am on the executive of APAW (Association for the Protection of Angell Woods) and we are trying to ensure that this last vestige of forest is NOT developed in Beaconsfield. There are several private owners that would dearly like to do this and we are pressuring our local politicians to use their ability to zone this area as protected. We know how difficult it is to work backwards once land is sold that should have been protected in the first place. DON'T SELL THIS LAND!

reply to this comment
Aug
07
2012

Good for you Yvonne! It's


cmalcolmson says:

Good for you Yvonne! It's really important to pick a place you love and fight to protect it. That's why we work on Big Bay Point.
People at Big Bay Point would have liked an opportunity to tell the government what they would like to do with this public land, but the government says they only need to consult people 100 meters on either side of this development. We are pointing out that this process should be open to better public consultation.

reply to this comment
Jul
09
2012

Friday Harbour


Steve says:

Firstly, I am an Environmental Studies grad from U of Waterloo (back in the 70's. I own a 100' waterfront home just south of the proposed area. I have been a waterfront owner since 1986.

I truly want a pristine environment for my family and community.

I understand selling FUD (Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt. This is exactly what Environmentaldefence.ca is selling.

I have read about the commitments the developer has made, the jobs to be created, the monies to be paid to our government coffers.
I have read the references to "learn about the harm ...(the) development poses" but ONLY found vague reference on how this "could" negatively impact the lake.

Hey, I'm open minded, just not gullible. I can see what the benefits will be but only left to "imagine" what the down side "could" be.

Help me to understand by providing facts not innuendos.

reply to this comment
Jul
10
2012

the BBP / Friday Harbour environmental impacts


cmalcolmson says:

Throughout the required public processes involved at Big Bay Point, Environmental Defence and the IDA assembled an impressive list of experts and evidence to show how the mega-resort would adversely impact the environment and habitat of species at risk.

Among these were:

• Highlighting how there had been insufficient study of the species and significant habitat that depend on the resort’s site. Among these are two endangered in Ontario, butternuts and Blanding’s turtle.

• Asking if the developer’s reports, especially the environmental impact statement, accurately accounted for the mega-resort’s impact on the area’s species, natural features and ecological function.

• Proving that these reports underestimate the damage the mega-resort’s interior road would do and overestimate the potential to successfully create new habitat to replace old habitat.

• Showing that significant woodlots would be hurt and that how interior forest lands would be accounted for was questionable; and that the planned golf course’s impact on water quality was not sufficiently reviewed.

Most notably, the IDA called two PhDs to testify, including Ontario’s foremost freshwater quality expert, Dr. Peter Dillon. He declared that it would be “impossible” to conclude the mega-marina would be good for the environment, and testified under oath that claims the resort would actually improve Lake Simcoe were “smoke and mirrors”.

A career Ministry of Natural Resources biologist testified about concern for Lake Simcoe’s threatened whitefish, doubting that digging a 118,000 m² (30-acre hole) in the shoreline would improve fisheries or water quality of the lake. An award-winning field naturalist testified that the loss of 100 acres of forest would be a significant loss of wildlife habitat and ecological function of one of the lake’s last remaining natural shoreline areas.

reply to this comment
Aug
07
2012

Digging has


Jeanine says:

I live next to the proposed resort and our neighborhood has deeded rights to a portion of the marina beach. We have gone swimming there with our dog over the summer since we walk him there nightly. The resort set up a boom recently and started digging. The water has been crystal clear until this weeksend and now is so filthy that we can't go swimming anymore. We let our dog swim this weekend and he came out covered with gunk - looked like a rescued animal from an oil spill. We had to throw his collar out because is smelled so terrible and hose him down for quite a while. Went back yesterday and it's still filthy. We can't let him swim there anymore because we don't know what is in the water - lot's of fuel and other residue from previous marina are being dug up. Could be a coincidence, but there are portions of the boom where you can see the stuff floating over. I am so discouraged. We have a beautiful community at Big Bay Point and between the noise and water pollution as well as the thousands of employees and new residents that will be pouring in on Fridays and out on Mondays once this is completed, I can't believe how much our lives are going to change. There is only one road into the point - there are not plans to widen any roads since these are not "permanent residents". How long is it going to take to get home from work? What can we do about the water? Can't wait to see what's going to happen to our well water.

reply to this comment
Aug
07
2012

The developer claims that


cmalcolmson says:

The developer claims that this resort will be good for the environment, and your story is a good example of the improbability of their claims. Originally, the developer wanted to basically build a subdivision at Big Bay Point, but they couldn't get permission. But due to a terrible loophole, they got permission because this is a "resort" now called Friday Harbour. We agree with you, Jeanine, that this resort, if built, will have a massive impact on the community and the environment. The future impacts you describe are the reasons why in Ontario you aren`t allowed to build subdivisions in tiny, isolated communities like Big Bay Point. The same should apply to resorts of this size.

reply to this comment