The Tribune

By ANNELIA NIXON

Tribune Business Reporter

anixon@tribunemedia.net

Local government has unanimously rejected plans for a controversial Green Turtle Cay development, setting the stage for the developer’s potential appeal to Nassau while members intensify efforts to persuade the Prime Minister to reverse the Crown Land grant and permanently preserve the site.

All five members of the Green Turtle Cay District Council voted against the Gillam Bay proposal by developer Reginald Curry, citing overwhelming community opposition and concerns over the long-term preservation of one of the Cay’s last undeveloped public coastal areas.

The decision follows growing resistance to a project which has already secured a certificate of environmental clearance (CEC) from the Department of Environmental Planning and Protection (DEPP) for nine 1,900-square-foot villas, a clubhouse with restaurant and bar, administrative offices and back-of-house facilities.

Elvardi Butler, deputy chief councillor, confirmed the Board’s unanimous position.“We did have a meeting to vote on the plans whether we’re going to pass it or not,” Mr Butler told Tribune Business. “We all denied it. All five of us.” However, he acknowledged the Board’s decision may not be the final word.

“Yes, he [Mr Curry] has an 18-day period that he can go through Nassau,” Mr Butler said, referring to the developer’s right to appeal. “And if we don’t have something substantial to say why we’re rejecting this project… Nassau has the ability to override us and say we have nothing substantial to say why this person should not proceed.”

Kirk Cornish, the North Abaco MP, had previously advised residents that any rejection by the local Board must be legally justified because the developer has legal avenues to challenge the decision. Rather than focusing solely on environmental issues, Mr Butler said the Board believes the Crown Land should remain available for future generations.

“At this point, we’re not just looking at the environmental state, even though it will have an environmental effect,” he said. “We’re just looking at the part that we’re trying to preserve that piece of property. It’s owned by government, and if government wishes, they could somehow take the property back and leave it for the future of Green Turtle Cay and The Bahamas. That’s what our cry is right now.”

The Board has now formally requested a meeting with Prime Minister Philip Davis KC. Council member Giselle McIntosh said reversing the Crown Land grant remains the Board’s primary objective.

“The reason we opposed it is because of the opposition from the community,” she said. “We feel like we were elected to represent the community, and that’s what we intend to do.

“We’ve reached out to the Prime Minister to get a meeting with him so that we can discuss what can be done. He’s ultimately the only person that can reverse the grant. And that is what we are proposing, so that Gillam Bay can then be deemed a national park or a preserve forever.”

Ms McIntosh argued the project raises issues extending beyond environmental concerns. “It is just an area that does not need to be developed,” she said. “There’s so many different reasons why. Environmentally, the fact that it’s a sand bar, the way that it needs to be built is a tremendous undertaking, more so than I think the DEPP realised.”

She also questioned whether the development conditions can realistically be met. “One of the restrictions on the CEC was that they can’t excavate,” Ms McIntosh said. “Well, it’s kind of near impossible to build something to that magnitude without excavation. Then we’ve got the waste management. We’ve got the strain on the infrastructure that’s already strained on Green Turtle - the dump, the electricity. There are just a million reasons why.”

She also criticised what she described as a lack of transparency surrounding Crown Land. “I think really the fact that it was Crown Land, number one, was not really put to the public,” Ms McIntosh said. “Had we known that they were considering giving that out as Crown land, we would have had that foresight to be able to stop it before it was even given to anybody.”

Instead, she said, Board members only became aware of the proposal after it arrived before them for consideration. “We didn’t know about the development until it was sitting on our desk,” she said.

Council member Wade Cash echoed concerns about both the site’s environmental characteristics and its importance to residents.

“When I was a kid, that was just a sand bar that the water flowed over the top,” he said. “It is a very popular place. We feel, as a community, and the Board, of course, that that should be kept for the people of Green Turtle. That was never meant for development.”

Mr Cash questioned the site’s long-term stability. “They’re saying that it’s all fine out there, but that sand came there that was washed there over the years,” he said. “It’s not a stable place for any building to go on. It can be washed away just as fast as it came there.”

He added that preserving the area is also important to Green Turtle Cay’s tourism product. “Our tourists go out there,” he said. “They love the place. Every evening in the summer, you can count probably 25, 30 boats out there just anchored and having a good time right on the beach there. And all that will stop if that should happen.”

Mr Cash also suggested the Government identify an alternative location for the investment. “I would hope that the Government would grant him another piece of Crown Land somewhere else,” he said. “Not there. We’re just strictly against it. Number one, it’s a bird sanctuary out there.”

When asked whether most residents oppose the project, Mr Cash replied: “100 percent. I’m sure you’ll get the chosen few that are in favour.” Mr Butler added: “I know the developer personally. At this point with this much backlash, if it was me, I would have just backed off. But I understand he has a vision.”

However, he argued the issue is about preserving a unique public asset. Mr Butler described Gillam Bay as the community’s last remaining publicly enjoyed coastal area, despite Bahamian law guaranteeing public access to beaches.

“All the rest of the properties that were sold were private,” he said. “We use the beach but we always feel like we are intruding on someone’s property. Even though we’re supposed to have access to these properties, when the developer comes in, somehow they push us out.”

Mr Butler said he appreciates the project’s vision but believes community sentiment should carry significant weight. “I see the vision he has,” he said. “I love it. But being me, I would just say: ‘This is my community. One hundred people live here, and 90 don’t want it. I’ll just leave it alone and find someplace else to put it’.”