South Belleville property owners provide clarification

The hopeful owners of a controversial piece of vacant property near Belleville’s bay shore want to set the record straight.

In a letter to media Josh Supryka of Rentx Group says the now city-owned property at South John Street and Harbour Street across from Jane Forrester Park would be meant to be developed for a community-based project, not a residence.

At a recent city council meeting council voted to defer a decision to transfer the property to the abutting owners for zero dollars in order to receive more detail on the proposal from staff.

Some residents of the area would rather the flat piece of land remain as is and open for public use.

Supryka stressed that any plans for the property would still need to go through a public process before any kind of development would be allowed.

The letter from Supryka can be seen below.

I am reaching out regarding the recent coverage and public discussion surrounding the proposed acquisition of the City-owned lands adjacent to 41 South John Street. Attached is a formal statement along with concept renderings that we hope will help clarify a number of inaccuracies and misconceptions currently circulating online and throughout the community.

Over the past several weeks, there has been significant public speculation suggesting that this transaction involved “backroom deals,” preferential treatment, or improper conduct by City staff or Council. We want to be very clear: those allegations are entirely false and unsupported by any evidence.

Based on the City’s own reports and by-laws, staff followed the established municipal process exactly as written. An appraisal was completed, fair market value was determined, the lands were reviewed under the City’s surplus land policy, and the property was classified as Class Three non-viable land in accordance with the City’s existing by-law framework. Council then considered the matter publicly.

It is important for the public to understand that this was not an approval for development. The next step would simply have been completion of the land transaction, after which any future proposal would still require environmental review, engineering, permits, site plan approval, Quinte Conservation review, and Ministry of the Environment compliance.

Quinte Conservation has consistently advised that development potential would be restricted to a single residential dwelling on 41 South John st existing lot. The proposed acquisition was intended to create an opportunity for a meaningful community-focused project while also assuming the environmental liability and remediation responsibilities associated with the contaminated lands.

Unfortunately, much of the current backlash appears to stem from misinformation regarding the process itself rather than the actual facts outlined in the City’s reports. Residents would still have had the ability to review and oppose any future development applications through the normal public planning process. Instead, public outrage is now being directed toward a transaction that had not even reached the development approval stage.

Our concern is that the ongoing misinformation campaign may ultimately jeopardize the opportunity to create something genuinely meaningful and beneficial for the broader community.