Big Bay Point proposal awaits OMB decision
By Chris Simon

The future of the Big Bay Point Resort now rests with Ontario Municipal Board officials.

Lawyers representing the supporters and objectors to the proposed 235-hectare Innisfil property made their closing arguments in an OMB hearing that will decide whether the project can be built, in Alliston last week. OMB officials have suggested they will decide on the matter within the next 30 days, said Gilbert's LLP lawyer David Donnelly, who represents the Innisfil District Association and two other groups opposed to the development.

"The board advised all the parties that they would attempt to render a decision within 30 days," he said.

If approved by the OMB, the resort would feature 1,600 residential housing units, 400 hotel rooms, a golf course, marina, conference centre, theatre, an indoor sports, recreation and fitness facility and retail space.

The project has been approved by Simcoe County and Innisfil municipal governments, and is significantly scaled down from the original proposal made by the Geranium Corporation/Kimvar Enterprises in 2002. The current proposal includes an 87-hectare stretch of environmentally protected land and the confinement of significant development to the eastern section of the property.

Developers have ensured the project will not cause environmental damage to the Lake Simcoe watershed, said lawyer Jeffrey Davies, who represents Geranium.

"The environment can and would be improved as a result of the development of the resort," he said. "Often, people assume development will mean it will be worse for the environment. We believe we were able to prove it will be better, coupled with all the recreational and economic benefits associated with the resort."

Donnelly disagrees.

"We called Dr. Peter Dillon, the world authority on freshwater lake water quality monitoring. He concluded the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority phosphorus numbers were 100 per cent too high, and that no development should be permitted without a very careful reassessment of the lake's health and capacity to absorb new pollutants," he said. "The county, town and developer have all taken the position the development will have no negative impacts from the resort. Common sense would tell you that isn't the case; our evidence showed that simply can't be true."

Geranium also failed to adequately consult with First Nations groups before the OMB hearing. He says the area may have significant First Nations archaeological and historical significance.

Opponents of the project have also filed a judicial review with the OMB, asking for more consultation with First Nations groups before a final ruling is reached.

However, Davies says a Geranium-hired archaeologist has already determined the site would not contain a significant find. The judicial review is also unfounded.

"Donnelly has really backed down (from many of his original demands) and a much more narrow judicial review will proceed," he said. "The court would have to decide what it means for the hearing."

Davies said his firm was able to counter all arguments made against the project.

"We very much felt we were able to rebut what we believe were unfounded criticisms," he said. "We're confident we put a really good case forward."

Donnelly says plenty of evidence suggests the project should not be approved.

"We're ecstatic with the case we were able to present to the board," he said. "We called nationally recognized experts in their fields. They all reached the same conclusion; this development is too big with too many impacts on the terrestrial and aquatic environment to warrant the board's approval."