BONFIELD – Emotions ran high at a public meeting in Bonfield on March 27 when over 200 people gathered to discuss a municipal rezoning application to allow for construction of drag strip on Development Road.
Proponent of the project Roger Leclair opened the presentations by stressing “I want to do something for the kids. The spirit of our youth is gone. We no longer have any hockey teams, the enrolment in the school is declining and there’s no baseball or soccer. This project will bring the community more income and will provide local work, with 40 or 50 people being needed during the big events and two people full time.”
Leclair said the $750,000 project would be situated in a valley surrounded by earthen buffers, about 1,000 metres from the road.
But despite the fact that Leclair promised to adhere to all provincial and environmental guidelines and would hold only five major events a year, the general feel of Bonfield residents at the meeting was “not in my back yard.”
Concerns about drinking and driving, increased traffic on local roads, environmental spills of oil and gas and associated air pollution, and decreasing property values for living near the Development Road site were raised.
One local property owner arrived with a letter from a real estate appraiser indicating that her property values could drop by as much as 40 per cent if the drag strip were built, citing “traffic and soil contaminations could have effects that would spread out over several miles. The loss of value in your home means there is no benefit for you in future if this development proceeds,” the letter said.
While Noella Duchesne said “I’m not against development, because we desperately need it,” she went on to ask council, “if it was going to go in your own back yard, would you approve it?”
When those from North Bay involved in drag racing in that community tried to explain how the annual drag strip at the airport was operated and alleviate some of the Bonfield residents’ concerns, Shelly Taylor told them “you don’t pay taxes here so you don’t have a right to say anything here.”
Clark North, a part-owner of the property and proponent of the race strip, said he could have made life easier for everyone “by pulling the wool over your eyes. I could have applied to build a private runway and then turned around and had special events but we’ve been honest with you from the very start. We’re willing to address your issues, but as for you guys carrying on about people from North Bay speaking here tonight, you’ve sent out flyers in Calvin and Astorville to get people to come here and speak against this project.”
North said the 200 acre property on Development Road was the best location for a drag strip as “it has 27 feet of sand and there will be no issue of ground water contamination. The drag strip will be in someone’s back yard, and if it’s not here, then all that revenue will go somewhere else.”
John Wilson, who spoke on behalf of all those opposed to the drag strip, pointed out the noise was a major concern.
He stressed “The loss of quiet enjoyment for residents, the whole peace and quiet factor,” and added that noise would also result in a reduction of property values and stress factors on local livestock such as horses and cattle. He also cited “impact on local policing costs due to increased traffic activity and property impacts of overnight campers.”
“Before advancing this application, I would request that the developer provide the following reports by accredited professionals, a noise study; traffic study; and impact study,” said Wilson. “None of these studies listed above are outside of the normal prudent planning requirements and the results of these studies will either ease the concerns of the residents or will indicate to council that the project should not proceed at the proposed locations and encourage them to search out an alternate non-impactive location. As long as council proceeds with prudent planning then I don’t think there’s an issue here.”
Councillor Bob Duggard who chaired the meeting said that Bonfield council will be considering all comments made on March 27 and is expected to have a decision on the rezoning application at its April 7 meeting.
Editorial
