Lawyers, opponents spar over witnesses at Big Pond RV park appeal

Questions over testimony from expert witnesses dominated the first day of an appeal hearing into a proposed RV park in Big Pond, Cape Breton.

The Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board is meeting in Sydney this week to hear complaints after CBRM councillors narrowly voted to rezone a property to clear the way for the proposed development.

Calgary developer Chris Skidmore plans to build a park for more than 540 recreational vehicles, with space for more than 200 in the first phase alone.

About 40 people filed into an air-conditioned conference room in the Holiday Inn basement for the first day of the hearing on Wednesday.

Residents of Big Pond are appealing the municipality's decision to rezone the land for the RV park, saying it will destroy the pastoral rural community.

Several witnesses were challenged by lawyers for the developer and the municipality and occasionally the UARB board chair for providing expert testimony.

The problem is they were not registered in advance as legally-defined expert witnesses.

The opponents are represented by Jim MacDonald, a former lawyer who now sells wild blueberries.

He said the group hopes to win, but opponents are saving on the cost of hiring experts in case they lose and have to appeal further.

"It's extremely expensive, and so there were a couple of experts that were consulted, and it wasn't $5,000 and it wasn't $10,000. It was on the high side of that," MacDonald said.

"Thus far (it's) not a problem for me, because I think the objections from the other side have been rejected in almost every case where I would hope that they'd be rejected."

CBRM solicitor Demetri Kachafanas said challenging witnesses is not out of the ordinary.

"I think that we're getting through it," he said. "There's just procedural questions that come up in most hearings and that's normal, and we're dealing with it and we're getting through it."

During his opening statement, MacDonald said he plans to call 16 witnesses who are permanent or seasonal residents.

He said the witnesses will show that CBRM councillors did not have enough information to make an informed decision on the rezoning proposal. He said municipal planning staff presented council with incomplete or "erroneous" information.

Roy MacInnes, who runs an organic vegetable and free-range chicken farm next to the proposed development, said despite what planning staff told council, the property that was rezoned is suitable for agriculture, according to a map he provided from the province.

Another witness, Carl MacIntyre, said he is concerned about the loss of "pastoral tranquility" in the rural community.

Several witnesses told the hearing they were concerned about the possibility of noise, traffic and pollution affecting their use of nearby properties.

And one, Rod Beresford, said the harbour adjacent to the proposed development is shallow and muddy.

Another said drawings accompanying the proposal are misleading, because there is no sandy beach.

UARB board members occasionally reminded witnesses that the hearing can only examine the narrow question of whether council's decision was reasonably consistent with the intent of its municipal planning strategy, which guides development decisions.

"This is an appeal under the Municipal Government Act," said board chair Roland Deveau. "And under the act ... the test to be applied in appeals to the board are quite restricted."

The hearing continues Thursday, and will run Friday as well, if needed.