CENTRAL MANITOULIN—Linda Peever chanced upon a letter in her mailbox recently that set off alarm bells—the missive from the Manitoulin Planning Board indicated that a developer had applied for a 39-lot subdivision to be located on the shores of Lake Mindemoya. She called some neighbours and several were quickly galvanized into action.
The owner of the Tracey Road property (lots 7 and 8, Concession IV excepting Part 1, Plan 31R-2831 located at No. 18 Tracey Road, Township of Carnarvon, Municipality of Central Manitoulin) is listed as Split Crow Partners Ltd. care of Lee Kieswetter.
“My main objection is that the lake is at maximum capacity,” said Steve Elliott, who owns property on the lake. “When you take in the number of homes on the lake, and then factor in the trailer parks, the density is high.”
Mr. Elliott and his neighbours have expressed serious concerns about the impact of the new development on water quality and the fish habitat. “The Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) have not kept up with water quality on the lake,” alleged Mr. Elliott, who said he had spoken with former MNR employees to get the background. “We need to protect the water before it is too late,” he said.
Mr. Elliott’s concerns have been heightened by his impressions of the current Ontario government’s “come-hell-or-high-water” and “environment-be-damned” approach to development. What makes matters worse to him in this case is that the proposed development will most likely consist of summer cottages—adding little actual housing stock to alleviate the current crisis and nothing to increase affordable housing. His views are echoed in several letters to the planning board that have been shared with The Expositor.
Ken Rautinen also has property on the lake and said that he is dismayed by the seeming lack of transparency in the process. He said that the landowners were told by Central Manitoulin staff that the property owners could not make a presentation to council on the issue. “They didn’t seem to care,” he said. Mr. Rautinen also voiced concern that only the neighbours within 120 metres of the development boundaries seem to have been sent a notice. “They should have notified everyone on the lake,” he said. “There also should have been consultation with M’Chigeeng First Nation (which boundaries on the lake and within whose traditional territory the lake is located).”
Ontario regulations stipulate that notices must be sent to landowners within 120 metres of the proposed development.
Central Manitoulin Mayor Richard Stephens suggested the reason behind the refusal to allow a delegation was related to “process and timing.”
“There has to be a public meeting to put it on the public floor,” he said. When it comes to the consultation process, “there doesn’t seem to be a rulebook,” said the mayor, adding that “council has not discussed it.”
Mayor Stephens, who sits on the Manitoulin Planning Board, said that he understood people’s concerns, but suggested that it was very early days in the process and far from being “a done deal,” as suggested by the lake residents. “A 39-unit subdivision does not happen overnight,” he said. “We need to ensure that all interests are consulted before a decision is made.”
The timing of the application to the Manitoulin Planning Board also alarmed lake residents. Anne and Steve Mills set out those concerns in their letter to the board objecting to the development.
“It seems as though the notification period was timed to coincide with the busy schedule of the holiday period and the low population of the winter off-season. This lack of transparency seems to indicate a rushed decision on the part of the board in which the involvement of residents was intentionally undermined,” they wrote.
Their letter also outlines concerns about the lack of consultation with First Nations, the lack of protection for biodiversity and endangered species, as well as migratory birds who stage through the area.
Concerns are raised in a number of letters about the impact of increased runoff and heightened phosphorus levels that could lead to increased incidents of blue-green algae, rendering the lake unusable to the public.
Adding to the residents’ concerns is that much of the land has already been cleared of forest, with the explanation given to Mr. Rautinen by the man clearing the land that the clearing was for “walking trails.”
It hasn’t helped to alleviate landowners’ concerns that the notices of the development went out before the MPB had received the archeological reports on the land in question—the reports are dated January 8, 2024. “Look at the archeological reports,” said Mr. Elliott. “How can the planning board have put it up for notice when they didn’t have the final report?” Mr. Elliott pointed out that the report’s conclusion is “that artifacts were found on the site and a stage 3 assessment with the band is required. The approval should be stalled until that happens.”
He pointed out that same report indicated that no work should be done on the property, making the clearing, Mr. Elliott alleges, in “violation of the report.”
A portion of the land in question is also currently being farmed, noted Mr. Elliott, suggesting that the development would be removing important agricultural resources.
Also adding to the residents’ concerns is their perception that the councillor for their ward appeared to be in support of the development. “All they see is the property tax dollars,” suggested Mr. Elliott.
Local tourism businessperson Maja Mielonen said that while she is all for development and progress, such development should not trump concerns about the environment and quality of life in the area. “We need to ensure that any such development is done in a way that causes little, or preferably no, harm,” she said.
Ms. Mielonen suggested that developments should be required to hook into existing municipal sewage and water plants in order to mitigate impacts.
It was pointed out that the previous owners of the property had applied to sever portions of the property to allow for gifts to their children, but that request had been turned down and the owners subsequently sold the property. The application from the developer indicates that no known previous severance application has been made on the property.
The Manitoulin Planning Board hearing for the proposed development is slated for January 30. Many of the lake residents are away for the winter, noted Mr. Rautinen. “That is in the dead of winter, it makes it hard for people to go to the MPB meeting.”
The proposal submitted to the board by Split Crow includes a mitigation plan that appears to address many of the concerns outlined by the opponents of the development.
That mitigation plan includes the objectives of notification of any cultural artifacts being found, “mitigation of construction” during migratory bird nesting season, notification of endangered species being found, a limited incremental construction area, no construction on farmland unless as permitted, dust suppression during construction, construction during daylight hours to reduce noise, community notification and information signage and existing transportation and traffic access.
The Expositor will continue to follow developments as this story develops.
