Lake of Bays resident Robert Zank says the private development of Langmaid’s Island—the second largest island in Lake of Bays comprising 128 acres—is just one more example of how residents in Muskoka are losing beautiful vistas and areas to meander with their canoes.
He has started a petition asking the Township of Lake of Bays to defend the island from development by expropriating the heritage site for all residents to enjoy. But he’s fighting an uphill battle.
The island was purchased for an estimated $15M and after more than five years of public meetings, heated debates, ardent opposition, and volumes of planning reports and studies, last month the Ontario Land Tribunal made its final ruling on the island’s development. Last September, the applicant, Langmaid’s Island Corporation, was granted development rights to create 32 building lots on the island to be accessed from two properties on South Portage Road in the Town of Huntsville, and last month the plan of subdivision was approved.
The tribunal was asked to step in for a non-decision from all the municipalities involved in the application, the Township of Lake of Bays which was asked to amend its Official Plan and zoning, the Town of Huntsville in which two mainland lots to service the island are located, and the District Municipality of Muskoka, which looks after plans of subdivision. All three municipalities tried to halt the extent of the island’s development but were unsuccessful.
The island holds a special place for both Lake of Bays and Huntsville residents.
Lake of Bays Mayor Terry Glover said he opposed the amount of development proposed, as did his council. He said they were dismayed with the Ontario Land Tribunal’s ruling, particularly as the island is designated a heritage site. “In the Township we’re disappointed. We were in the fight at the tribunal with the Lake of Bays Heritage Foundation and the Lake of Bays Association but we’ve all come to accept what the decision was, so we’re disappointed but we’re moving ahead.”
Glover said what’s important now is to monitor how building on the island takes place. “I’m sure lots of residents will tell us, who are watching it even closer than us, if there are any concerns and we’ll address them as they come up… There are a number of restrictions on the builders as they progress, but I don’t know if there’s going to be a rush to build,” he said, adding that the municipality would be protecting everyone’s rights, including the rights of those who buy a lot on the island.
Glover said he believes the tribunal is very much pro-building and housing and its decisions tend to slant in that direction.
His view is shared by Lake of Bays Councillor Jacqueline Godard. It was one of the issues that made her run for Lake of Bays Council in 2018. “We did all we could in Lake of Bays to protect the island. It is a designated heritage area and so it didn’t matter to the tribunal,” said Godard. “And now we’re in a position when applications come to planning, there’ll be so many constraints still, that anyone who buys the lots will have to deal with the constraints.” She said building on the island will be costly as there won’t be a road network and each lot will have to be accessed by their own shoreline area. “It’s costly to build on islands so I wish them luck,” she added.
The Lake of Bays Heritage Foundation as well as the Lake of Bays Association (LOBA) were parties in the lengthy proceeding at the tribunal. They have both stated that they are disappointed with the OLT decision.
“Having said this, we achieved some wins that would not have happened without our participation as parties to the OLT process. The process had two stages: first, the three-week hearing in 2021 that resulted in the decision to approve development. A second hearing was scheduled to finalize the plan of subdivision, which falls under the authority of the District of Muskoka. Prior to the second hearing, each of the parties agreed to Terms of Settlement with LIC (Langmaid’s Island Corporation). A settlement hearing was held on June 7 and the OLT decision was issued on July 6. The Draft Plan of Subdivision is approved subject to the fulfillment of the conditions as detailed in Schedule 2 of the decision,” explained LOBA in its newsletter to its members.
It noted that four blocks had been set aside as conservation properties, namely the island’s two highest peaks as well as the rock cliffs on the south end of the island and two rock barrens. While the boundaries of the conservation areas are to be clearly marked, public access is prohibited.
The organizations were also able to push for larger lot sizes than required under the Township of Lake of Bays’ Official Plan and 23 meters of shoreline buffers will be required as opposed to the 20 metres normally required by the municipality’s OP.
Residents will not be able to clear shoreline activity areas of trees unless the trees pose a hazard. Pathways to the shoreline cannot be more than two metres after building activity resumes. In addition, the Township is tasked with overseeing “character guidelines for all built structures,” states LOBA.
Other wins include implementing recommendations from a Boating Impact Assessment, which includes long-term ownership requirements and maintenance of the mainland parking and access, and the preparation of an ecological stewardship manual that explains to the new owners their role and responsibilities related to the island’s ecology. The plan will be required to be approved by the District of Muskoka and given to all prospective buyers. According to LOBA, LIC has also agreed that there will be no barging on statutory holidays or weekends.
“In all, 30 conditions must be fulfilled for final project approval to be granted. LIC has five years to clear these conditions, after which they would need to apply for an extension,” states LOBA. “It will be incumbent upon the District of Muskoka, The Town of Huntsville and the Township of Lake of Bays to stand firm on each condition of approval and future development. The opportunity for variance and amendment requests always looms, and we expect our municipal planning departments to stay true to the intent of the settlement. This is likely the last waterfront subdivision of this scale on Lake of Bays. Let’s get it right… Over time, 32 new families will join the Lake of Bays community. We should welcome them and lead by example so that they too will be good stewards of the lake,” added LOBA.
Zank isn’t quite ready to give up. He has started a petition, which you can find HERE (Pdf). He can be reached via email at [email protected] or by calling 705-990-3379.
“I wish him luck because we’ve done all we can do…,” said Godard.
You can find the OLT’s decision, HERE (pdf).
Related:
Protecting our natural heritage: The Langmaid’s Island story | Commentary
Don’t miss out on Doppler!
Sign up here to receive our email digest with links to our most recent stories.
Local news in your inbox so you don’t miss anything!
Click here to support local news
I have been on Langmaids Island a few times, back when my Dad built the road out to Frozen Point (now Jo-Lee Point rd.) for Harry Wright. Sometimes out by boat, but more often by snow-machine. It was hard to land a boat in a lot of places, because like most of Muskoka, and as the song goes “its got ’em”. Trees and rocks that is. ‘Rocks and Trees’ is a song by Wendell Ferguson.
The south side is reasonably shallow so the fallen trees are submerged and along with the rocks, can bang up a prop or lower unit if you aren’t careful. Snow machine was better, going in where the island is narrow and there is a little crescent beach.
I don’t think it was given as property in the Free Land Grant era, and was only purchased later, maybe the late 20’s or early 30’s. Someone must know the actual history. But it wouldn’t have made much of a farm, being mostly Eastern Red Hemlock, shallow soil, God’s own granite and an Island. Bad ice is on either side of winter and leaves one stranded on any island. ‘Til it really thaws or really freezes. The people who are going to cough up the money for a piece of this place, won’t be there, then. It’s laughable when someone like jason bolduc spouts off about “much needed housing”. Not on Langmaid’s.
But the whizz-kid who pronounced this place to be okay for development must be sleeping on his side. Stuff is running out. Everything will go by barge or over the ice, including materials for septic systems. Solar or wind or will they contract for under water power transmission? All this can be done for sure, but jason bolduc, you are a well to do dude, if you can even rent one of these proposed homes for a week.
And the bit about cutting trees if they are damaged or diseased! You can see the way developers have treated the ‘damaged or diseased’ within our town itself. Imagine when they get loose on an island. Out of sight. That old adage about begging forgiveness…… “It was damaged and we pruned it right down to the stump. That’s where the stump was. Sorry.”
And once it’s gone, it’s gone.
The Heritage Society had a “First right of refusal” to match the Purchaser’s offer when the Island was for sale in 2016/17, but unfortunately didn’t raise the required funds in time.
Expropriation comes with a cost. It sounds great. Get all the lakefront owners to chip in via their tax bills. And it can be a private play area!
If they build 32 lots, then the mainland access will require 32 parking spots and I’ll assume 32 parking spots for boats to access the island cottages, probably a launching ramp also. If each owner has a visitor or two up for a weekend then then there will be 64 -96 cars parked. Sure as heck there will be overflow and the roads will be used for parking also. I have a cottage in the Muskoka region and that is exactly what happens close to us. Boats coming and going at all hours, cars parking on road, talking, noise, etc. etc. Not really what I signed up for. Feel sorry for everyone who will be impacted by this mistake.
What a heartbreaking shame. Another bit of beautiful Musllka lost and destroyed.
In response to Jason Bolduc’s comment, this has absolutely nothing to “much needed housing”. After purchase of the island, legal expenses, interest on loans, etc, the DEVELOPERS cost per site has to be in the area of $400,000 to $500,000 or more per vacant lot. On top of this you have to add the extra costs of the two waterfront landing developments.
They did not do this for good will, they did this for profit. My guess would be that they would try to sell the lots in the $800,000 to $1,000,000 range just for a single vacant lot.
The new owner then has to add the cost of a house. Building on an island is more expensive than building on the mainland. All in all the new owners will have to dish out somewhere between $2-$3 million dollars before they can move in.
And on top of that you have to remember that these are SEASONAL residents, they will probably be used for 5 months out of the year at best. This isn’t fulltime housing. This is for the rich and elite. It has nothing to do with a housing crisis or creating AFFORDABLE housing. There is nothing affordable about this project.
This island could have been put to better use as a tourist attraction or nature preserve.
Lets see.
The Tribunal, is now actually just one person so maybe it should be called a “unibunal”. The old case of having three reviewers is long gone in the name of efficiency, read speed.
If my memory serves me correctly the “non decision” issue which sent this to the “unibunal” in the first place was caused by some bureaucratic time lines that the Township could not seem to circumvent.
I don’t know what planet Jason Bulduc lives on but, with respect that he may not be familiar with the area, I think Mary Brown has answered this point about “needed housing” pretty well. Anybody who thinks anyone in the “needed housing” market is going to have anything to do with this island property is quite simply out to lunch and needs a brain realignment to bring them closer to reality. The only people who might build on this rock will be rich, use their home only in the best curated months of the year for recreation and more than likely have nothing to do with the day to day living of “residents” in the area.
My family at one time had over 4 miles of shoreline on Lake of Bays, it was not on islands either, but over the years since 1905 and due to the fact that we did not win a major lottery, we were gradually forced to sell this land off, bit by bit due to the tax burden. This process continues.
Only the very rich very small minority of Canadians, or maybe foreign investors, can afford waterfront in this area now. The average working family from Muskoka will NEVER own waterfront here. They simply can’t afford it.
MPAC calls this process something about placing the land in the “highest and best use”, which is their speak for “pack in the units on every inch as dense as possible, to maximize profit for a developer today and increase municipal tax revenues”. This could be distilled to one word, “greed”, but regardless of what it is called we shall worry about tomorrow later, if ever, after Joni has sung about paving things over a few more times.
The notion that the housing on a property such as this is “needed” is complete bullshit. These will be luxury, elitist homes not affordable necessary housing. The Ontario Tribunal lakes any transparency and is run by developers. This development do we a not need to happen and is contrary to any climate initiative.
As Joni says “ they paved paradise and put up a parking lot”
When will we ever learn.
The Land Tribunal is undemocratic and pro Development, almost always.
These special places need protection.
I see nothing wrong with the developmemt or the use of the purchased lands.Sounds to me again our older councillors who stuck in thier mindsets are haulting much needed housimg again.Instead of being proactive and supportive they are going to step over everyones right to land use.Another waste of taxes of time mamagement that could br used for better things.Seems it’s okay to add to the minicipality’s tax coffers but hey you can’t take down the trees or affect the shoreline.In reality the mumicipality of Lake of Bays has no legal control over shorelines.It is and always will be federal control and say.