Louisbourg Waterfront Development Project at an Impasse

goCapeBreton.com Team Follow Me

Posted this 2016-06-03 4:17 PM ADT (updated 2016-08-12 3:35 PM ADT)

Louisbourg, N.S. - Synergy Louisbourg, the group behind an $11 million dollar waterfront development project for Louisbourg, has hit an impasse as a result of recent decisions made by the CBRM preventing the group's incremental build from going ahead as planned. Synergy and their strategic partners, however, are not giving up on the project. They will continue to work together to ensure this sustainable vision for Louisbourg's future, built in collaboration with the community, becomes a reality.

The project would provide a desperately needed boost to the local economy by creating jobs, opportunities for entrepreneurship, and growth in the community. Synergy's goal is to encourage tourists to come and spend more time exploring all that Louisbourg has to offer, as well as the National Historic Site. Currently only five percent of visitors to the Fortress of Louisbourg are stopping in the community and this project would turn that around. However, in the absence of the required land and the necessary approvals for the development, Synergy has ceased to expend public funds on further project planning and design.

Project highlights:

▪ New visitor welcome and orientation centre located on the waterfront;

▪ Upgraded pier for recreational boats and a Ferry to the Fortress;

▪ Spaces for artisans and businesses;

▪ Upgraded boardwalk, rebranded as Crabwalk; and

▪ Spaces for residents and visitors to enjoy.

“The plan borrows from ideas that have worked in other coastal communities and the transformation is dependent on changing current visitor patterns so that visitors to the Fortress of Louisbourg National Historic Site stop in the community,” says Dan Glenn, landscape architect and planner for the project. He adds, “it creates convenient waterfront access, supplies ample parking and offers unique experiences that currently do not exist in the community such as a Ferry to the Fortress.”

The impasse stems from the following:

▪ Lack of certainty around the land transfer.

▪ The completion of a public participation process approved some time ago by Council to allow the community to voice support or objections to the transfer of the land for this development. Synergy has asked that the process be conducted as soon as possible in the community so as many residents as possible have an opportunity to provide feedback.

▪ Decisions by the CBRM to curb the waterfront development by providing only a portion of the land required for the project and placing limitations on its use which curtail private sector opportunities. These measures threaten the sustainability of the project by limiting it to a visitor centre and removing other income-producing elements.

▪ Inadequate number of parking spaces jeopardises a planned move of the Parks Canada visitor welcome and orientation centre into the town.

▪ A late May decision about the immediate use of the land and buildings for visitor services in 2016, and the limitations placed upon improvements to the buildings, has meant that it is impossible to go ahead and set up visitor welcome services at the location this summer.

“We remain hopeful that the Cape Breton Regional Municipality will reconsider and remove the barriers to this project going forward," says Dorothy Payne, chair of Synergy Louisbourg. “We asked them for their active support and specifically outlined what that meant and we believe that the community is counting on them to do their best to ensure that this much-needed economic development goes ahead now."

Synergy has worked with the CBRM to complete the engineering design and tender package for the boardwalk and pier. With the design completed, this work, which was included in the CBRM's budget for this fiscal year, can now go ahead leaving additional funds to contribute to other elements of the recommended improvements to the waterfront. Synergy hopes to see all of the budgeted funds spent in Louisbourg in this fiscal year.

To learn more about Synergy Louisbourg Development Society and Destination Louisbourg visit www.louisbourg.ca. If you have any questions or concerns please feel free to contact [email protected].

-30-

For more information contact:

Kelly O'Brien

PR & Events Coordinator

Fortress Louisbourg Association

[email protected]

902-578-0151

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

Like 8 Dislike 0

FOLLOW 20

4,751 23

CBRM decisions block Synergy Louisbourg's waterfront development plans.

23

Depth
Tim Menk Follow Me 2016-06-04 12:33 PM ADT Reply 4 0 Having followed the efforts being made to revitalize Louisbourg, I was dismayed by the lack of sufficient support by regional council for the painstakingly crafted development plan put forward by Synergy Louisbourg. In order for this visionary plan to be implemented, full consideration must be given to how important each of the components is to the successful execution of the project. Without allowance for acquisition of property to create sufficient new parking spaces, it is unlikely that Parks Canada would agree to locating the Fortress welcome centre at the Louisbourg waterfront, which is an integral part of the overall plan. I urge regional council to reconsider their position on Synergy's overall plan. Without implementation of key interconnected parts of the plan, a sustainable future for Louisbourg is left in some doubt. An outcome that would see this historic community not brought back to its full potential would be a loss for Louisbourg residents, CBRM and for the Fortress of Louisbourg itself, which is a vital driver of tourism to this part of the island.
Gary LeDrew Follow Me 2016-06-05 6:04 AM ADT Reply 2 0 Meanwhile the Trailer Park is closed this has a huge impact on Tourists. Instead of staying they have to move on. There is a huge impact on the theatre and local restaurants. And 4 people have lost their jobs. We need this park reopened for the season immediately Joe Ward Follow Me 2016-06-05 11:06 AM ADT Reply 1 0 The motorhome park never had to move on. They indicated they had no intention of renewing their lease. And, one might reasonably assume, this was due to their support of the Synergy plan. The CBRM, with a tremendous amount of help from Councillor Kevin Saccary, a man willing to press the lethal injection button for his own district, killed the project and left Louisbourg with less than they started with. Tim Menk Follow Me 2016-06-05 11:27 AM ADT Reply 3 0 I agree Joe.Two weeks ago I spoke to Christina Lamey at the mayor's office about Mr. Saccary's conflict(s) of interest when it comes to his having registered the name Destination Louisbourg Society with Joint Stocks. This despite the fact that Synergy was the first user of the name Destination Louisbourg, of which he was fully aware. I followed up with an email to the mayor with the Joint Stocks document attached. Since then, no response. I also spoke with Ivan Doncaster and Alfie MacLeod about this issue and followed up with a similar email as had been sent to the mayor. Ivan expressed bafflement as to why Saccary would have done such a thing, but as far as I know, he has taken no steps to address the issue. Alfie expressed concern about the situation and, knowing Alfie, I believe he is working behind the scenes to get to the bottom of the issue. I also spoke with the mayor about the issue at Ports Day. I said that Saccary's actions were almost certainly in contravention of the code of conduct oath he took when he was elected. I suggested that, at minimum, Saccary ought to be forced to recuse himself from any votes having to do with Louisbourg unless and until he resigns from the board of the Destination Louisbourg Society, or better yet, moves to have the society dissolved. Again, no response from the mayor on this issue. To be continued... Joe Ward Follow Me 2016-06-05 11:50 AM ADT Reply 1 0 Very pleased to hear that you've been following up on this aspect with local leaders, Tim. I've been doing a little digging into the code of ethics and obligations of council as well. Nobody seems to have given any attention to the immensity of the conflict of interest Saccary has willingly put himself into, whilst working a double agenda. What makes it even more grievous was that he underhandedly attacked the project within council meetings without ever acknowledging his conflict or his multiple teardowns on the group via the Cape Breton Post. The first article even quoted Saccary and the Manager of the Harbour Authority in Louisbourg as though they represented separate interests. Yet, they are both on the brand usurping "Destination Louisbourg Society". Their affiliation wasn't disclosed. I'm not sure how reliable Mr. Doncaster will be when it comes to his colleague, Mr. Saccary. IMO, he's likely to be much more up to speed on what Saccary is up to than he might want to let on: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zPQ7n-Hp9bc Tim Menk Follow Me 2016-06-05 12:24 PM ADT Reply 2 0 Hi Joe- I was aware of Ivan's comment to Saccary about Dorothy Payne. I don't place great weight on that comment, as I think Ivan is ordinarily a fine and respectful fellow. I am sure he would be embarrassed if he was aware that his offhand comment had been picked up by the microphone. IMO it doesn't indicate ill will toward Ms. Payne. It reflected more on Ivan's having known and worked with Saccary for nearly 30 years. Saccary was most likely the source of the "first lady" title, which Ivan was simply repeating to Saccary as Ms. Payne took to the microphone. The use of a disparaging title or misinformation seems to be standard practice with Saccary. From what I have observed, he uses hurtful comments and misstatements of fact to the media as tools to undermine those he sees as opponents. These are not the acts and the type of behaviour we should expect from public servants. Joe Ward Follow Me 2016-06-05 12:54 PM ADT Reply 1 0 Mr. Doncaster stated his apologies if his comment was interpreted other than the way he described his intent when saying it. I appreciated his follow up, and he was very respectful in our communication, though I was not convinced by his explanation. However, my concern with the comment is more about how it hints at a lack of scrutiny, seriousness, and the extent to which Saccary's behind the scenes lobbying was effective with the mostly neutered council. I.e. Ray Paruch, Eldon MacDonald, and Mae Roe being the only reliable ones to consistently raise their voice or objections to issues or proposals taken to council for discussion. If his comment is any indication of his 30 years of familiarity with Saccary's "standard practise", that certainly wasn't a very effective way of discouraging Mr. Saccary from doing so. In fact, it would likely encourage more of it. Ms. Payne has done a tremendous amount of work as evidenced by the elaborate plans they provided for the project, and represented herself very professionally and respectfully. All members of council should have given her a respectful and professional audience. In fact, her careful handling of Saccary's underhandedness made him look foolish. The "First Lady" comment was quite the revelation of what the tone of behind the scenes communication about Ms. Payne and the Synergy project must be. And if we consider Saccary's CB Post comments as what he's willing to say in our regional paper for all the public to see, what is he capable of behind the scenes? Side note: I also appreciate Mr. Doncaster's repeated notes about the Gabarus Louisbourg highway link, as it was relevant and, by all appearances, a very good project to pursue. Mitch McNutt Follow Me 2016-06-05 11:31 AM ADT Reply 2 0 Thank you so much for sharing your perspective. We are always interested and wanting to hear what people in the community are thinking regarding the Synergy work. Open communication is really important. In that vein, I wanted to provide a bit more context to the RV Park situation. Following the decision of the previous managing association to no longer operate the RV Park and a letter of support for the waterfront development, Synergy Louisbourg, Destination Louisbourg, made every possible effort, beginning in late 2016, to establish visitor welcome and information services on the waterfront in time for the 2016 season. By May of 2016 it was clear that we were not in a position to proceed. Insurmountable barriers included but were not limited to: - Failure of CBRM to offer permission to access the site within a workable time frame; - Delays to signage plan implementation that undermine potential success of waterfront visitor services; - Restrictions within the CBRM Letter of Permission that did not allow for alterations, reducing the ability to bring buildings up to code for electrical reattachment (if required) and other potential renovations (if required) related to Occupational Health and Safety and Accessibility; and - A CBRM requirement to sign a legal agreement Synergy Louisbourg, Destination Louisbourg, did not have the authority to sign. Synergy Louisburg cannot enter into an agreement, legal or otherwise, that would bind one of our partnering organizations. Improved business opportunities, jobs, and the opportunity for young people and families to chose here as home are at the core of our vision for the future. We remain committed to doing all we can to support community economic development. Mitch McNutt Follow Me 2016-06-05 12:00 PM ADT Reply 0 0 One small correction to my previous post, I stated "beginning in late 2016" and should have said "beginning in late 2015" Joe Ward Follow Me 2016-06-05 12:00 PM ADT Reply 1 0 By comparison to how other projects - particularly Archibald's Wharf - are rushed through with minimal opposition from council... by all appearances, the CBRM was getting in the way of the Destination Louisbourg project. I think it would be very challenging for them to demonstrate otherwise. It just further emphasizes the mayor's bias to downtown Sydney and the port project. Maybe an offer to let McKeil park a tugboat in the Louisbourg harbour will help speed things up. ;) The issue paper stunk of CAO Merritt's interference. The CBRM should get out of the way as quickly as possible, and let a group with more resources, sophistication, and experience with actual economic development projects do what they do: ACOA.
Bill Fiander Follow Me 2016-06-05 10:23 AM ADT Reply 2 0 Only 5% of tourists to the Fortress per year spend their time in the Town. With this idea 100% of the tourists would have to make their initial stop in Louisbourg before going to the Fortress. Last year the Fortress had over 75 thousand visitors. That would be 75 thousand people spending time in the town instead of 3-4 thousand. What would this mean for the businesses presently there? What would this mean for further investment in the town? Now with the recent decision none of this is going to happen, and Louisbourg will in fact be worse off this year than last. Joe Ward Follow Me 2016-06-05 11:25 AM ADT Reply 3 0 The basic intent of the Synergy plan was almost inarguable. A 5% capture rate of tourists passing through the town is an immense lost opportunity. It affords the type of ongoing decline that puts schools like George D. Lewis on the chopping block. However, from the perspective of downtown Sydney, killing the deal is an incredible opportunity for them, reflected in the mayor's biased agenda. A 5% capture rate in Louisbourg, means 95% returning quickly to Sydney with their wallets still full. They want their souvenirs and local art purchased at the Joan Harriss Cruise Pavilion, and they want their dining experiences focused in close proximity. A slapped together issue paper jammed in enough hurdles to get in the way of the ACOA and Parks Canada development funding laying in wait, ready to sign the cheques. Someone may want to remind Mayor Cecil Clarke that he wasn't elected as the Mayor of Sydney. He's willing to let a farm full of healthy laying hens freeze to death, while he tries to sell us all on hunt for the golden goose... Will he be able to ride that into retirement? It's very unlikely he'll be able to ride it out until the emergence of the next CPC government finds a place to plant him out of the way.
madeline yakimchuk Follow Me 2016-06-05 12:00 PM ADT Reply 0 0 What can be said except, even if you miss it this year, get out the vote the fall. Louis burg is not going anywhere. The opportunity will suffer, but will survive a one year wait. Don't give up, but get out the vote.
Iris Stevens Follow Me 2016-06-06 6:25 PM ADT Reply 0 0 I tried leaving a post and it wouldn't work Tim Menk Follow Me 2016-06-06 6:40 PM ADT Reply 0 0 Hi Iris- Not sure what the problem might have been. I ran into an issue with one of my first comments. It wouldn't post because I exceeded the 2000 character (including spaces) limit on comments. Mary Campbell informed me that I can avoid that limitation by writing a 'post' rather than just making a comment. If that wasn't the issue, maybe call the GoCapeBreton team tomorrow so they can identify the problem: .800.331.2282
Iris Stevens Follow Me 2016-06-06 7:01 PM ADT Reply 3 0 I have lived in Louisbourg all my life and I have never seen our community as it is today. I would like to bring this to the attention of our mayor and councillors. What has happened to our community where there once were beautiful buildings with restaurants, stores garages and pharmacy now we have closed buildings other buildings that should be repaired or destroyed. We did have a health clinic where four doctors worked together. Now that is gone. Sidewalk benches which have not been replaced .a boardwalk Where many people enjoyed a walk has become very dangerous. The talk on the street is our harbour which was one of the busiest harbours in the world is now only being promoted for commercial activity. I understand we have a harbour authority board. Who and where they are I am not sure. They should be promoting our harbour as cruise ship destination.We have the largest tourist attraction in North America. We do not have a sewage system in our harbour as most communities have. CBRM is responsible for this. If we would have had the support of all levels of government the Fleur De Trail would have been completed many years ago. There is a fear that the visitors will bypass Sydney if this road had been completed. I am not asking, I am begging you Mr. Mayor to work with your councillors and support the plan that Synergy has in place to spend 11 million dollars to provide employment and give our town the facelift it needs. Other communities seem to be moving in the right direction why not give us the same benefits other communities have. What would happen if Parks Canada decided they are going to close the Fortress can you imagine this impact on our Cape Breton economy .Check the statistics and you will see the people employed at Parks Canada don’t only come from Louisbourg but all over Cape Breton.Please if there is anyone out there that has any influence with any level of government we need your help. madeline yakimchuk Follow Me 2016-06-06 7:08 PM ADT Reply 0 0 The Mayor has made it very clear that he emphasizes Sydney over CBRM, and it is a shame. We hear so much about "community" but if we really were a community we would be pushing for community based development all over the island, and even support a commercial harbour in Canso if it makes more sense than Sydney... really, moving to Port Hawkesbury is a lot less of a change than having to leave the island completely. We are a tiny speck in the world and have to stop with this competing with ourselves thing. Joe Ward Follow Me 2016-06-06 8:00 PM ADT Reply 1 0 For the smaller cruise ships that can enter the Louisbourg harbour, there is no better harbour in Cape Breton to showcase. The idea of cruising past the Fortress is tremendous. I would love to see that pursued. I think the news about the smaller cruise for golf enthusiasts is an excellent model to pursue. Let's think about this for a minute. History coming to life with the Fortress of Louisbourg versus a selfie in front of a Big Fiddle? I don't think there is much support to be had from the councillors. Councillor Saccary, the representative for Louisbourg, did about as much as one could reasonably expect in order to tear down the Synergy Louisbourg group in the media. The three vocal councillors (Paruch, Eldon, Rowe) are Sydney. Saccary never once fessed up before council, and I've heard nothing mentioned about his conflict of interest with the "Destination Louisbourg Society - an organization that appears to have been set up intent on usurping the "Destination Louisbourg" brand. Full on underhandedness. I'm not sure what he was thinking by getting in the way of a project with support from Parks Canada, ACOA, the Province of Nova Scotia, Destination Cape Breton, and even the CBRM itself. I'm sure that many of those agencies will certainly recall what he did in relationship to the Synergy Louisbourg project when he finally comes looking for something. Hopefully, when that time comes, he'll already be departed from his role as councillor for the district - a role in which he's poorly suited and non-deserving based on his actions. The mayor played nice with the project in the beginning stages, though nothing was ever expedited. His transition began in the second last council meeting with Synergy presenting when he started making excuses about not having an opportunity to communicate with the other players. That was despite having his CAO and solicitor talk about how they were in communication with ACOA regarding the project just the meeting before. Joe Ward Follow Me 2016-06-06 8:05 PM ADT Reply 0 0 Here is the mayor making that long winded excuse: https://youtu.be/uj1AAuAifQs And here is Saccary with more underhandedness, trying to corner Ms Payne and prevent her from an opportunity to correct his feigned and completely insincere misunderstanding: https://youtu.be/AEfwFFD2seo Tim Menk Follow Me 2016-06-06 9:16 PM ADT Reply 2 0 Dear Iris- Your narrative is the most compelling that I have seen on the subject of the importance of CBRM and the communities that make it up coming to the aid of Louisbourg. To not pursue the planned developments in the community will be to imperil not just Louisbourg, but as you so well stated, may threaten the Fortress and all the tourism dollars it brings to this island. Please, anyone and everyone who is willing to do so, please contact your councilor and urge them to fully fund the development plans so that 2016 will be another year of more lost business and community vitality.
[comment deleted] Posted 2016-08-03 12:07 AM ADT
[comment deleted] Posted 2016-08-03 7:52 AM ADT
Bill Fiander Follow Me 2016-08-03 10:52 AM ADT Reply 3 0 Comment in today's CB Post on the Local Councillor: Flabbergasted in District 8 August 03, 2016 - 09:21 I am flabbergasted that once again the Cape Breton Post is showing favoritism towards this particular councillor. This is the second time this press release has been post by the paper. Compared to the small blurb given to his opponent Amanda MacDougall. This comes after multiple stories in the Post about Kevin's disdain for Synergy Louisbourg and the Destination Louisbourg brand which included absolutely zero fact checking. If they had of done even the most basic fact checking they would have found out that the welcome sign they were complaining about was not the sign that Saccary heroically stopped from being put up, but instead the sign directing people to the Louisbourg Lighthouse. This says nothing of his underhanded involvement with sitting on the Destination Louisbourg name by being a director of a society created for the sole purpose of making sure that Synergy would not be able to sue the Destination Louisbourg brand. Questioning what groups in communities are doing is fine, concerns and disagreements tend to lead to a better solution overall, but this councillor and his apparent Cape Breton Post clique don't believe that it should be a two-way street. If they did The Cape Breton Post would post the Letters to the Editors that have been critical of Councillor Saccary, and they would have done the proper research, like journalists should, before posting articles for him. I hope both Councillor Saccary and the Cape Breton Post take this criticism seriously and try and figure out how to be better, the people of District 8 need that. Bill Fiander Follow Me 2016-08-03 11:17 AM ADT Reply 3 0 Soon after this posting, the CB Post finally announced Amanda MacDougall's candidacy and the story on Saccary mysteriously disppeared. Mathew Georghiou Follow Me 2016-08-03 1:11 PM ADT Reply 2 0 Bill, I recently posted this comment on Facebook and thought it is relevant to your frustration above ... >>>>>>>>>>> This is one of the big problems with traditional print media. One or two people at the newspaper decide which Letters to the Editor get published, and which get tossed. They also EDIT them however they see fit (I don't think that many people realize that the newspaper actually edits other people's letters). And, if readers do not agree with the letter, they have little recourse. Sure, you could write a letter back, but those same one or two people decide whether they will publish it or not (and they usually won't) ... and, if they do publish it, it usually appears days or weeks after the original letter, so most people reading the rebuttal have no idea what the context is. It's not a proper way to have a meaningful dialog in a community. This is one of the many reasons we created goCapeBreton.com where you decide what you want to share with the community and you can allow people to comment back so that you can have a meaningful conversation. >>>>>>>>>>>> So, if you know people who wrote Letters to the Editor that did not get published, invite them to post them on goCapeBreton.com ... we don't care what side of an issue a person is on, we just want to give them a voice.