CENTRAL MANITOULIN—Hot on the news that the Carter Bay development properties has a new owner, six delegations gave presentations to the Central Manitoulin Finance and Economic Development committee, bringing their concerns about development on the sensitive properties forward in no uncertain terms.
The Carter Bay development was born in controversy and has remained a challenging thorn in the municipality’s planning and development side through the years.
The delegations were prompted by a decision by the Central Manitoulin council to withdraw a contravention to bylaw notice to a property owner in the development who had constructed a 9-foot by 12-foot building without the proper clearances.
All of the delegations present opposed council allowing building without extensive environmental assessments and conditions on development. The owner of the property in question was present at the committee meeting but declined to make any presentation himself.
The first delegation was by Michael C. Bailey, the new owner of the Carter Bay development properties who was represented at the meeting by realtor Chris Bousquet, a personal friend of the new owner. Mr. Bailey currently lives in California, but has strong links to Manitoulin having grown up in Little Current. Mr. Bousquet read a letter from the new owner, who apologized for not being able to attend.
“I would like you to understand that this isn’t a large nameless developer looking to take advantage of this beautiful property,” he wrote. “To the contrary, I grew up in Little Current, went to grade and high school here and still own property near Little Current. My siblings and I are regular summer visitors. I still know many Islanders. I am not a developer.”
Mr. Bailey, son of the late Dr. Jack Bailey, said that his intent in purchasing the property was “a simple one. It is a beautiful property and needs to be protected from developers who would take advantage of it and leave scars behind.”
While Mr. Bailey said that he might wish to “selectively develop” the property at some time in the distant future “if I did, I would only want to do it in the most respectful manner and in a way that preserves its beauty. That said, my intent at this time is not to develop it.”
Mr. Bailey stressed that he was not against responsible development, per se, as he recognised some of the benefits that can accrue to the community, but that he was adamantly opposed to “illegal and irresponsible development.”
To this end, Mr. Bailey said that “to allow structures to be built and remain, especially on the sensitive beach and dune area, is effectively to approve illegal development. If you allow this now, what is to stop others from doing the same?” He went on to recognize that the building in question was small and that it is easy to claim that “it is not really development. But it is development. It is contrary to the law. And it is in an environmentally sensitive area.”
Mr. Bailey noted that he had engaged development expert Narasim Katary to “look at the property and explain his perspective.”
Before Mr. Katary provided his perspective, however, Andre Probst of Central Manitoulin delivered his presentation to the committee members. Mr. Probst brought a map which was pinned up to the wall of the council chambers with colour coded markings showing each individual owner in the massive development. “I think there has been misinformation as to the number of people involved,” he said, noting that although a media report had suggested 300 owners, there were actually only 108 owners in total.” Of the 107 (not counting Carter Bay Properties LLC) actual owners, he continued, only 60 are on the waterfront and only 33 actually have road access. “Those roads do not exist,” he pointed out, indicating road allowance marked on the map.
Mr. Probst suggested that any future development should only occur with piped water and sewer connections. Like the other delegations, he emphasized the danger to the ecology of the area posed by development and the need for a full environmental impact study before any development is allowed to proceed.
Another presentation was made by Therese Trainor (who stressed she was taking part as a private citizen and not part of any organization that she belongs to) who delivered a list of those 16 endangered plants and animals that are believed to exist on the properties.
Wiikwemkoong elder Josh Eshkawkogan spoke to both the archeological and spiritual aspects of the property, pointing out that studies have indicated the dunes, beach and associated properties have been identified as holding significant historical potential. But it was in the area of highlighting the spiritual aspect of the land and the water that Mr. Eshkawkogan was most animated. He described the property as “a very special sacred place,” particularly to the Anishinaabe people.
Mr. Katary provided an in-depth look at the Carter Bay properties based on two themes. “First is the importance of preserving the ecologically sensitive Carter Bay Area. Second is the importance of a municipal legislative body in Ontario upholding the rule of law.”
The delegate provided an impressive list of credentials to back his credibility, noting that he had retired in 2006 as a member of the quasi-judicial Ontario Municipal Board after serving for 17 years. “Prior to this I was the director of long-range planning with the City of Greater Sudbury (then region) for 14 years.”
Mr. Katary then went on to list those factors that make up the ecological sensitivity of the Carter Bay properties, citing its immense biodiversity that includes both flora and fauna, a good number of which are currently endangered. “To permit piecemeal developments in such a unique area without any regard for proper planning is akin to saying that a wart on the cheek does not cause disfigurement of the face.”
Mr. Katary said that the municipality needs to “send a clear message to him (the owner of the building) that in this municipality we welcome responsible development. Right now, the most forceful way to send that message to him is to remove an irresponsible development.”
Mr. Katary noted the dimensions of the building, that it has a chimney that suggests a wood-burning stove. “It is a stand alone structure in the middle of a sand dune surrounded by a beautiful landscape.”
The delegate cited Section C-8 of the Manitoulin Official Plan which designates the subject property as a planned development district and Section 7.20 of the Zoning Bylaw, which categorizes the subject property as a Planned Development Zone. “As you know well, the illegally erected structure is contrary to the intent of both the Official Plan and the zoning bylaw,” he said. “It appears as though the municipality does not want to enforce its own regulations and has abrogated its responsibility to the public by seeking opinion from a distant provincial government.”
Mr. Katary issued a request to the property owner who built the structure to voluntarily remove the structure. “Please reflect on this sir,” he said. “I appeal to your conscience.”
He went on to request that the municipality adhere to its Official Plan Policy and zoning bylaw requirements and arrange for the “expeditious removal of the cabin on sand dunes.”
Property owners Dr. Roy and Cathy Jeffery, represented by Dr. Jeffery, noted that they own eight lots in the Carter Bay area purchased around 2000 and another five some five kilometres west of Carter Bay proper.
“When we purchased these lots it was made very clear by the seller and our lawyer that the area was designated planned development and no building was permitted,” he said. Dr. Jeffery cited the danger to endangered species posed by development and went on to “request the council to continue to enforce the no building regulations designed to protect the sensitive areas of Carter Bay, including seasonal parking restrictions on trailers.” He went on to say “we continue to support a development freeze until such time as a plan of development, informed by appropriate study, exists.”
Following the delegations council chair Councillor Alex Baran thanked the participants and noted the council would be considering the information provided in their deliberations on the issue.
