1. Details
  2. Membership Vote
  3. The IDA Position
  4. Town position

Details

Geranium/Kimvar Corporation are planning a resort development that incorporates the Marina at Big Bay Point and 600 acres of adjacent lands. The development is a commercial venture that will include a convention hotel, boutiques and restaurants, an 18 hole golf course and 4200 residences.

The Innisfil District Association is opposing the project based on the direction which we received from the membership. We are working in cooperation with other groups in opposition to this project.

We anticipate that at some point in the process this project’s future will be determined by a hearing at the Ontario Municipal Board.

The Association is providing a special focus on all the environmental issues associated with this development.

Membership Vote

In a special membership survey on the Marina Project, 50% of the members responded, and opposition to the project was 83%, with 13% in support and 4% indicating No Opinion.

Questionnaire for the Membership of the BBPDA

Are you for or against the Marina Project to be developed by Geranium/Kimvar Corporation?

Background

Geranium/Kimvar Corporation is planning a major resort development that encompasses the existing Marina and 600 acres of adjacent lands. It is planned and will be developed as a resort community and not a settlement community. The plan anticipates that most of the residences will be second homes with a minority being occupied by permanent residences. The development includes a convention hotel, golf course, marina/yacht club, commercial area, restaurants, shops and 4200 homes, condominiums and town houses. The project will take place over 15 years and when completed will accommodate an expanded local population in the order of 10,000, a town within the Town of Innisfil, which presently has a population of 28,500. A public consultation process called a ‘charette’ was held in Stroud by the developers. Since the ‘charette’ plans have been made to substantially increase the size of the canal area to the equivalent of two football fields in size and allow for additional ‘boat slips’ for local people and visitors.

Arguments For

This will be a unique development that will attract new residents and tourists to Innisfil. The project will bring municipal water and sewage facilities to Big Bay Point that will result in replacing some septic systems and reducing phosphorous leaching into the lake. It is a high density development that will provide many local facilities to reduce the use of the automobile and encourage walking. Innisfil will enjoy short-term and long-term economic spin-offs. The golf course will be built to international standards to protect the environment. The developer will be planting new trees to replace many of the old trees that will be cut down.

Arguments Against

The project will change the character of the Big Bay Point area with a present population in the order of 1500. The tourist destination nature of the project will attract other tourist projects with a permanent impact on Innisfil’s perceived ‘small town atmosphere’. It is difficult for a developer to control a resort development and a large number of seven months a year permanent residents can be anticipated with a requirement for additional local services. To build a world class golf course and a large number of residences, much of the greenbelt area will be cut down. Heavier traffic on the lake and heavier local road traffic can be anticipated.

The IDA Position

Our position was determined by direction we have received from Simcoe County that no major projects should be proceeded with until proper growth management studies are completed. We consider the Marina Project premature since no allowance is made for this kind of development in the Town’s Official Plan. Innisfil needs to determine if it wants Resort Development, and, if so, what kind, how many and where. Determining policy by exception is poor planning and will open the flood gates to similar developments around the lake.

The official public meeting on the Marina Development was held on May 6th. At that meeting large numbers of construction workers were bussed in with the result that over 100 IDA members could not get into the hall to ask questions and to issue their objections. It is our belief that the Town in failing to hold a second meeting have not lived up to their legal requirements as outlined in the Planning Act.

The Official Position of the Association presented at the public meeting:

Presentation to the Town of Innisfil and Simcoe County in Opposition to the Proposed Ammendments to the Official Plan of the County of Simcoe and the Official Plan of the Town of Innisfil and Zoning By-Law 24-83 of the Town of Innisfil

By Don Avery,
President

The plan for a resort community of 10,000 people is proof that there is a huge demand for second homes.

Let’s look at some preliminary numbers provided for the developer in the Market Needs Analysis by Clayton Research Associates Limited (Feb. 20, 2003) (page 8).

In Ontario according to the Census, the average of 2nd homes in both 1996 and 2001 was 7.7% of all households.
If we look at GTA alone, the number of households is expected to grow from 1,780,500 in 2001 to 2,589,679 in 2021. If we apply the 7.7% factor 2nd home factor, we could anticipate that 62,330 of those households would be looking to purchase 2nd homes over the twenty-year period.

It is obvious that both the Town of Innisfil and Simcoe County need to prepare a comprehensive approach to considering proposals for Resort Communities.
To date major Resort Community development has not been contemplated or planned for in either the Town or County Official Plans.

Before deciding on any specific proposal, the Town should undertake a study to determine if Resort Community development will be to the Town's long-term benefit.
What are its benefits and liabilities, and what is best for the people of the Town?
This type of development is serving a market from outside the Town, not local residents.

If this type of development is determined NOT to be of significant benefit to the Town, then NO such project should be approved.

If Resort Communities are determined to be good for the Town of Innisfil, the Town must take charge of planning its own future, not just react to one proposal. The Town should then plan for such development as it would for any other major land use category. The following questions (among many others) should be addressed in a Growth Management Study:
How many Resort Community housing units does the Town want over the next 20 years?
Where should Resort Community projects be located in the Town to provide the maximum benefits and create the minimum impacts?
What options are available for accommodating such development (e.g. several sites with varied recreational amenities, one large project, smaller sites linked to the existing community structure, etc.)?
Should Resort Communities be integrated into existing identified community settlement areas to support their development.
What are the opportunities and concerns if people start to live in Resort Communities on a full time basis?
What hard and soft services, facilities, community structure, etc. are needed and how can these best be provided?
Health services are a particular concern for major population growth, due to the existing severe shortage of family doctors in the Barrie area. This is compounded by the uncertainties of new diseases like West Nile virus and SARS.
What physical and fiscal capacity does the Town have to provide these services and facilities?
Will development of Resort Communities affect other priorities of the Town for this capacity?
Phosphorus loading into Lake Simcoe is a critical issue for the future health of the lake and the viability of its lakeshore municipalities. Can the sewage treatment capacity required for the Geranium proposal be replaced in the future at a reasonable cost, or will meeting the higher standards of the LSEMS (Lake Simcoe Environmental Management Study) policy make this economically unfeasible?

All of the developer's submissions have been focused on justifying one site adjacent to and including the present Big Bay Point marina. Narrowing the discussion of Resort Communities to the minute details of the Geranium proposal ignores the broader issue of proper long range planning for the Town of Innisfil. That is the proper responsibility of Town Council, representing the views of all the residents of Innisfil.

The Association supports the present Town Official Plan policies.

Some key policies to be noted from the Town of Innisfil Official Plan:

The population target for the Town to the year 2011 is 45,200 persons. (Policies 2.4 and 3.3) This target does not include major population growth of ultimately 10,000 to 12,000 persons in the Big Bay Point area.
There has been no demonstration of "community need for the use(s) proposed" (Policy 3.3). All the information provided has referred to "market need" or "market demand" and has attempted to justify a massive development on this site in Innisfil based on the demand for such resort facilities from the Greater Toronto Area and beyond.
The policies for the Shoreline Policy Area state, "With the exception of marina operations, major commercial development and major inland extensions of the present development areas shall not be permitted." (Policy 5.11.2) Marina operations specifically exclude residential units except one residence for the owner, operator or caretaker. (Policy 5.11.3) A 200 room hotel and conference facility would be considered a major commercial development, and a 4200 unit residential development would be a major inland extension of the present development area.
The ultimate development area anticipated to be serviced by the municipal water and sanitary sewer systems will extend north to the middle of the 12th Concession. (Policy 3.12) The Geranium proposal lies outside of this area, in Concession 13.
The current Town of Innisfil Official Plan does not allocate any substantial growth to the Shoreline designation, yet the Geranium proposal is that their lands be designated Shoreline Exception, an “exception” the equivalent of almost ˝ of the existing population of the Town. Some exception!


The Association supports the present County Official Plan policies.

Some key policies to be noted from the County of Simcoe Official Plan:

Residential developments of more than 40 lots are not permitted in the Rural and Agricultural land use designation. (Policy 3.6.7) Residential developments of more than 20 lots are not permitted in the Greenlands designation. (Policy 3.7.6) These are the applicable land use designations for this proposed resort development of 4200 residential units.

The County decided in April, 2000 that housing developments of more than 40 units are to be directed to existing settlement areas. The Big Bay Point District Association Inc. encourages the County to reaffirm this policy.

The County Official Plan requires local municipalities to undertake growth management studies which form the basis for identifying the amount of growth to be directed to settlement areas and other land use categories. (Policy 3.1.1) The Town has no growth management study directing how much resort condominium development, if any, it wishes to have.

There is no urgency or crisis situation here that requires the Town or the County to make a decision without thorough consideration of all the impacts of this type of development.

In conclusion, we respectfully submit that the Town of Innisfil and the County of Simcoe reject this proposal as PREMATURE, until the Town and County have carried out the proper planning studies as noted in this submission.

-30-

APPENDIX

What is the potential demand for Resort Community development in the Town of Innisfil and County of Simcoe over the next few decades? Will the Big Bay Point proposal be the only one? OR is this just one of the first of the wave of many applications for resort communities that our municipalities will be facing?

The Big Bay Point proposal by Geranium is huge! With its proposed population of 10,000 – 12,000, it represents almost half (˝) of the existing population of 26,700 in the Town of Innisfil. The size of this proposal alone gives us an idea of the potential market interest for Resort Communities.

Let’s look at some preliminary numbers provided for the developer in the Market Needs Analysis by Clayton Research Associates Limited (Feb. 20, 2003) (page 8).

In Ontario according to the Census, the average of 2nd homes in both 1996 and 2001 was 7.7% of all households.
If we look at GTA alone, the number of households is expected to grow from 1,780,500 in 2001 to 2,589,679 in 2021. If we apply the 7.7% factor 2nd home factor, we could anticipate that 62,330 of those households would be looking to purchase 2nd homes over the twenty-year period.
This figure could be much higher, due to higher incomes in the GTA, the growth in the baby boom generation and the desire to get out of the GTA.

Why will Resort Communities be attractive as a 2nd home option? Clayton Research (page 8-9) provided some answers:

Baby boomers are the highest 2nd home ownership age group;
Lakefront sites for second homes near large metropolitan are becoming scarce and expensive;
Not everyone wants the drudgery of cottage ownership;
Rising real income and financial well being;
2nd homes are perceived to be a good investment; and
Resort communities appeal to the growing number of adult buyers aged 55+.

What is necessary for a successful Resort Community development? Clayton Research (page 13-14) concludes that the significant attributes are:

A location in close proximity to a large metropolitan centre;
A large site;
At least two major recreational amenities on site or in proximity; and,
A variety of accommodation by type, price range, and tenure, including hotel rooms with ancillary commercial and recreational facilities.

Do the Town of Innisfil and County of Simcoe have the attributes to attract Resort Communities?

Location: The Town Innisfil and Simcoe County are located close to and have easy access to the GTA.
Sites: There many “large sites” available.
Recreation amenities: Any combination of recreational amenities could be developed to make up a resort community, such as a marina, the Lake Simcoe shoreline, theme parks, golf courses, tennis centres, skiing, indoor recreational complexes including wave and water pools, amusement parks, etc.
Design: There are many developers, such as Geranium, that are capable of designing communities that meet the specifications.

The Town Position

What transpired at the August 13th Town Council meeting was obviously a new plan negotiated by the Town with the Developers. By bringing forward a proposal for preliminary approval, the Town is able to be on both sides of the issue politically. They are seen as supportive for those who want the project and yet signaling caution about a number of important issues still to be resolved for those who are opposed. The Town was able to negotiate a deal where even any potential OMB costs the Town would bear would be paid for by the Developer.

These were the conditions that still need study under the Council resolution:

1. Implications of changes in the Town’s Official Plan.
2. The need to get the necessary approvals for additional sewage and water capacity so that other areas of the Town are not penalized.
3. Some reaffirmation that the fiscal plan is solid which implies the preservation of the proposed mix of seasonal and permanent residences. (Planners always consider resort communities as eventual residential communities.)
4. Concerns about the natural environment are met. (Really a County and Provincial Issue that is not given enough attention by the Town.)
5. Guarantees that what is being proposed is what they will deliver. (This is very difficult to guarantee because ongoing accommodations can be anticipated to keep the commercial section of the project viable.)

The unanimous motion developed under the direction of the Town’s solicitors effectively locks everyone out from receiving any details because of client confidentiality, and enables the lawyers to negotiate a final deal with the Developers on behalf of the Town.

It was shocking that any kind of preliminary support would be given when there are so many issues of concern to the County, such as the need for growth management studies, the protection of County Greenlands, phosphorous loading, hospital requirements, waste disposal and so on.