Big Pond RV Park: Breaking News

Breaking News. 

Those of you who have been reading my posts about the Big Pond RV Park know that I have been mystified by CBRM's position that they do not have the jurisdiction to consider the environment in their planning decisions.

A brief reminiscience: 

  • After the public hearing on the Big Pond RV Park, Planning wrote a reply to the concerns expressed there: Here is a excerpt: 

"To expect a municipality whose jurisdiction covers less than 25% of the Bras d'Or Lake watershed and whose jurisdictional responsibilities don't cover the scope of concerns expressed at the public meeting and in written submissions to take on the role of environmental protector is neither fair nor realistic."

  • Councillor Earlene MacMullin  - click on her name to watch a video of her comments on this topic - had this to say: ""It's [the environment] not our jurisdiction. We do zoning changes every single day." 

  • Councillor Kendra Coombs - Click on her name to watch her comments on this issue. Councillor Coombs wanted to consider the environmental impacts of this development. 

 

  • Planning  - Click on this word to hear Planning`s comments which ironically warns of a UARB overturn of Council`s decision should they consider the environment. 

  • Councillor Steve Gillespie - Click on this word to hear Steve I am an RVer Gillespie`s comments - He seems to be under the impression that the "UNESCO issue" is a federal responsibilty. Start watching at around 100.03. 

So, we know that the CBRM position was, and in some cases still is, that they have no jurisdiction over the environment.

I am super pleased to announce that I finally, after almost 2 years, have received an answer to my question about whether the CBRM has the power to consider the environment when making planning decisions.

YES, they do. 

I received an email from the CBRM director of planning yesterday, Michael Ruus, in which he states that should Council request it, the recommendations and guidelines for development on the Bras d`Or Lake published by The Bras d'Or Lakes Collaborative Environmental Planning InitiativeUNESCO, The CBRM Municipal Climate Change Action Plan and other sources could be followed in the CBRM. 

You cannot separate what happens on the land surrounding the lake from the lake, environementally speaking. 

If Council wants to better protect the  Bras d'Or Lake by adopting development standards, there is nothing stopping them from doing so. 

I must say that trying to get a clear answer on this isuue should not have taken two years. 

I am thinking of a way to do 2 things, maybe some of you reading would like to help? Please send me a message here if so. 

1. Urge CBRM Council to create a transparency and accountabilty policy. 

2. Urge CBRM Council to put policies in place that protect the environmental health of our beautiful Bras d'Or Lake. They have the power.

 

As it turned out, the UARB ruled that the people who live near where the proposed Big Pond RV park could not be reasonably protected from its visual and sound impacts, and we will see in September whether the NS Court of Appeal thinks that the board made an error in law. 

But regardless of this controversial proposal, the lake must be protected at the municipal level.

I am counting on Council to do the right thing, 

Posted by
Receive news by email and share your news and events for free on goCapeBreton.com
SHOW ME HOW


2,833 11
https://capebreton.lokol.me/big-pond-rv-park-breaking-news
Gov Government News Municipal Government Gov Political Commentary Location CBRM Location CBRM Big Pond

11

Log In or Sign Up to add a comment.
Depth
Lorna MacNeil My Post Follow Me
http://chng.it/ppcWsSTztX If you support protecting the shores of the beautiful Bras d’Or Lake, please sign this petition. Simply copy the link above and paste it into your browser.
Perry MacKinnon Follow Me
And the CAVE people (Citizens Against Virtually Everything) will rejoice...but hopefully logic and reason will prevail in this issue.
Joe Ward Follow Me
After seeing the initial idea (concept drawings), I was optimistic about it. However, community members certainly came together and raised many valid concerns. I don't think this issue fits neatly into the slot for CAVE or NIMBY. It's a great-sounding project, that might have selected the wrong location and/or the wrong scope. I think the questions raised about whether or not declaring something a biosphere actually means anything about infringing development, or if the municipality can ignore their policies related to various factors when there is internal support for informally-greenlighted projects are actually important questions.
Lorna MacNeil My Post Follow Me
Yes, and the idea that a municipality can boldly state that they cannot consider the environment when making planning decisions, when they plainly can, is wrong. They should say they don’t want to consider the environment and then voters can decide if they support that position.
Perry MacKinnon Follow Me
The Dept of Environment should be making these decisions. Neither the CAVE people nor the municipality have the expertise to make informed decisions such as required here.
Lorna MacNeil My Post Follow Me
Perry, the Department of Environment has a different role. Only the Municipality can decide, for example, that we should have minimum lots sizes to protect wells and water we draw from them.
Perry MacKinnon Follow Me
Precisely, the municipality deals with the finer details once any issues are dealt with by Environment, Fisheries etc. They should have little or nothing to do with a yeah or nay on the project if it passes the environmental hurdles.
Lorna MacNeil My Post Follow Me
But they are supposed to, as municipalities, plan so that the environment is protected. And if they don’t, no one else will. This is from the MGA: “The purpose of a municipal planning strategy is to provide statements of policy to guide the development and management of the municipality and, to further ) this purpose, to establish (a) policies which address problems and opportunities concerning the development of land and the effects of the development; (b) policies to provide a framework for the environmental, social and economic development within a municipality; (c) policies that are reasonably consistent with the intent of state- ments of provincial interest; and (d) specify programs and actions necessary for implementing the municipal planning planning strategy. 1998
Lorna MacNeil My Post Follow Me
The Big Pond proposed development, as the UARB ruled, does not meet the standard of protecting people who would live near it from visual impacts and noise. But we also learned that the CBRM does not consider the lake’s environment when making planning decisions and they clearly should.
Perry MacKinnon Follow Me
Yes, all accurate, but since the municipality does not have, will not have, and should not have (we are taxed enough!) the environmental expertise, they have to rely on the province, and possibly the feds, to look after that business
Lorna MacNeil My Post Follow Me
Municipal planners and Council are responsible for figuring out what kind of development should go in what kind of places. West Hants, for example, does not allow any new buildings to be built in the area they have identified as dykelands. Municipalities know how to do this: We pay several people in the planning department to do exactly this kind of work, under Council’s guidance.

Facebook Comments

View all the LATEST
and HOTTEST posts
View

Share this comment by copying the direct link.

  • Our Sponsors

Using this website is subject to the Terms of Use that contain binding contractual terms.