To: Mayor Rick Maloney & Bracebridge Town Councillors
Your Worship,
Re: Future Bracebridge Hospital Site Selection Seriously Flawed by MAHC – (Open Letter)
I am sharing the following information on my own behalf and not as a representative of any group or organization.
I also acknowledge that the physicians of South Muskoka Hospital have agreed upon forty-six beds for the accepted model. My comments are not an attempt to increase that amount. I wish to outline, however, that should the hospital be built at the Pine Street location owned by the Town of Bracebridge, it will not only be at significant cost to the taxpayer, but it also will greatly inhibit future growth of the hospital and Bracebridge area.
Overview:
The land donated to the Muskoka Algonquin Healthcare by the Town of Bracebridge at 300 Pine Street site has substantial and fundamental flaws. After reviewing the site selection process, several serious concerns have come to light that will adversely affect this community for generations if not addressed now.
I had the opportunity to discuss this matter with Mr. David Murray, Medcura consultant hired by the Town of Bracebridge. After presenting my remarks to him, he requested that I submit my comments to him with any alternative ideas regarding land selection. While he acknowledged receipt of my input, Mr. Murray noted, however, that much of the information I provided was outside the scope of his mandate for the council’s report. I therefore submit this crucial information direct to the Town Council and for public information.
Land selection started several years ago, with a public request from Muskoka Algonquin Healthcare for hospital site submissions, resulting in five potential sites identified for the new Bracebridge Hospital. The two final locations were:
1. 300 Pine Street, Bracebridge – Owned by the Town of Bracebridge 2. 1975 Muskoka Beach Road, Bracebridge – Owned by Muskoka Royale Development Inc.
I shall highlight several serious issues that have not been disclosed to the public nor to many past and current members of the Bracebridge Town Council. For instance, MAHC had not revealed that land preparation to provide forty acres of useable land on the donated Pine Street lands will cost possibly in the range of $50 – $180. million taxpayer dollars. This amount is required just to cut the large hill to prepare the land for building.
Additional land acquisition(s) are now required to augment the Pine Street location. The massive potential costs to redevelop beside 300 Pine Street will take millions of dollars away from funds that should be spent on paying for the hospital bed numbers in Bracebridge. MAHC had consistently denied this amount when the issue was raised at public meetings. Since then, however, MAHC admits that this could be the actual costs. See more on this later in this report.
The Muskoka Algonquin Healthcare (MAHC) consulting companies, Urban Strategies Inc. (“USI”) and Stantec announced the initial site preferred for the hospital was at 1975 Muskoka Beach Road. MAHC later advised that the final site was to be at 300 Pine Street. MAHC advised the change occurred after the required due diligence had been conducted at Muskoka Beach Road. MAHC refuses to divulge the engineering report to substantiate any reasons for this divergence. Why would USI/Stantec make an announcement of this magnitude involving such a major decision as the site selection, if MAHC did not recognize that 1975 Muskoka Beach Road was superior to 300 Pine Street?
The limitations of this donated land by the Town of Bracebridge to MAHC at 300 Pine Street, will significantly restrict the future development of the new hospital and growth within our complete town.
The unsuitability of the Pine Street property is seriously detrimental to the future growth of the hospital, restricting hospital additions, preventing construction of ancillary medical facilities, labs, research centre, childcare facilities, medical residences, etc. Huntsville already has availability for these future potential developments on their town’s selected lands. Also, there are no reasonable areas at Pine Street for development of additional commercial and residential homes in the immediate area as recommended by the Ministry for hospital locations.
The MAHC Board of Directors failed to reveal that in order to construct the hospital they will need to acquire additional property beside 300 Pine Street to meet the Ministry’s requirement of forty acres of “usable” land. MAHC is currently attempting to purchase additional land beside 300 Pine Street, since they realize the hospital cannot be built completely on the Town of Bracebridge donated site.
Comments:
1. In December 2023, the Muskoka Algonquin Healthcare (MAHC) identified a 40-acre site at 300 Pine Street in Bracebridge for the new hospital. This property, purchased from Fowler Construction on June 23, 2023, is now owned by the Town of Bracebridge. It is located directly east of Highway 11 (though it has no direct access to Hwy #11), adjacent to Walmart commercial lands to the north, a residential area and Catholic school to the west, and J.D. Lang Park to the south.
2. On July 22, 2024, I met with five members of MAHC, including Chair David Uffelmann, CEO/President Cheryl Harrison, and CFO Alasdair Smith. During this meeting, MAHC presented several disturbing facts about the Bracebridge site selection, which indicated that 300 Pine Street is not a suitable location for the hospital.
3. In 2017, the Town of Bracebridge worked with Fowler Construction to secure 300 Pine Street as a potential site for a future hospital. Fowler agreed to reserve the property for the town, granting them the first option to buy if another offer came in. If MAHC deemed the site suitable, the town would purchase it outright for the hospital. This land was sold by Fowler to the Town in June 2023. Later that year, then-Chair Moreen Miller, MAHC confirmed its selection as the new site for the Bracebridge hospital following due diligence. It later came to light, however, that the second phase of due diligence on the Pine Street property did not occur for reasons that remain unclear.
4. The topography of the Pine Street site significantly limits the usable land donated by the Town, resulting in an area far less than the required forty acres mandated by the Ministry of Health. For reasons that are unclear, Fowler Construction chose not to extend the Town’s first right of refusal to acquire the land after waiting several years with this clause in effect. This decision by Fowler appears to have prompted the Town of Bracebridge to expedite the outright purchase of the property in June 2023 for $1.3 million prior to the completion of the second due diligence. MAHC had previously informed the Town that the site would meet the hospital’s building requirements; however, this information was inaccurate, as the land does not comply with the Minimum Requirement set by the Ministry of Health.
5. The usable acreage at 300 Pine Street falls significantly short of the Health Ministry’s requirements for a new hospital. The property contains a tall rocky hill and a large rock pit, rendering much of the land unusable. Consequently, MAHC is currently pursuing the acquisition of additional land adjacent to 300 Pine Street. The great difficulty created by the pit plus MAHC attempting to purchase additional lands has never been disclosed to the public, keeping in mind all negotiations and any associated costs have not been made public.
It is important to note that MAHC has already announced Pine Street as the final hospital site in Bracebridge, despite the necessity of still having to obtain additional land to meet Ministry standards. MAHC has not yet completed this process; does not have assurance of the ability to purchase the additional lands required; nor has MAHC conducted the required due diligence on the lands that must be purchased. How could MAHC announce that this property is suitable when it clearly is not? Again, I ask, is MAHC designing a smaller hospital for Bracebridge in order to move forward on these grounds.
6. In April 2023, Ms. Moreen Miller, Chair of the MAHC Board, along with Cheryl Harrison, the CEO, and the Capital Redevelopment Committee, announced that the preferred site for development was 1975 Muskoka Beach Road, rather than 300 Pine Street, which was one of five potential options.
7. This raises several questions: Why did MAHC initially announce the site owned by Muskoka Royale Development Inc., if they were aware that the 2nd due diligence at Pine Street was incomplete? Furthermore, how could they confirm 300 Pine Street as the selected site, knowing it did not meet Ministry standards nor had the required second due diligence? What prompted the sudden decision to shift from the more suitable property at 1975 Muskoka Beach Road to the less favorable location at 300 Pine Street?
8. The previous Gravenhurst Council had favored Muskoka Beach Road, which was also initially recommended by MAHC’s engineering firms, USI/Stantec. MAHC, however, has refused to release their report on this matter.
9. Another advantage of 1975 Muskoka Beach Road is its proximity to the 40 acres of flat land studied for the new Bracebridge hospital, where there are more than 50 acres of vacant land suitable for a “Campus of Continuum of Care”. Muskoka Royale advised that they planned to build long term care homes, 24-hour child care centre for hospital staff, training facilities for healthcare professionals and residence for new recruits of hospital who relocate from out of town.
10. MAHC has asserted that the 1975 Muskoka Beach Road site contains designated “Provincial Significant Wetlands (PSW),” which limits its potential uses. Mr. Chen, the principal shareholder of Muskoka Royale, disputes this claim and has requested the release of the USI/Stantec report to support his position. There should be no barriers to MAHC being transparent on this matter, and the report should be released without delay.
11. When asked if MAHC would consider another section of the 800-acre Muskoka Beach Road property, they stated that they had already selected their site at 300 Pine Street (Fowler site) in December 2023 and would not entertain alternative options, including other suitable areas within the 1975 Muskoka Beach Road property. This refusal by MAHC was in spite of the opportunity to receive $20 million in direct benefits.
12. Initially, Muskoka Royale proposed selling this land to MAHC, but later offered to donate 40 acres from its 800-acre property instead. MAHC was advised that they choose any location for the hospital on this land, except for any area currently being developed. This land donation was valued at approximately $10 million. Mr. George Chen also offered to donate $10 million in cash the hospital was built on the Muskoka Royale property.
In January 2024, MAHC’s Chief Financial Officer, Mr. Alistair Smith, stated that this late offer by Muskoka Royale and Mr. Chen fell outside the bidding window, albeit, by just a few days. Given the substantial combined value of $20 million, one must question why this site was overlooked? At that point, the Muskoka Royale property would only be competing with the Town’s property, which would significantly enhance the community’s contribution to the hospital costs by $20 million. The Town would still have an additional $10 million to allocate towards the local share, totaling $30 million.
12. To further incentivize the Town, on September 1, 2024, Mr. Chen sent a letter to Mayor Rick Maloney proposing to purchase the land at 300 Pine Street in order to relieve the Town of this property that would not be utilized by the Town if not used as the hospital site. He offered to reimburse Bracebridge for the full cost of the land acquisition and cover all legal expenses incurred by the Town related to the Pine Street purchase (see attached letter). Additionally, Mr. Chen expressed his intention to donate a portion of the Pine Street land back to the Town to establish a public park for the residents of Bracebridge in that area.
13. During a meeting with MAHC on March 11, 2024, then-Chair Moreen Miller indicated that she would provide the USI/Stantec report justifying the choice of the 300 Pine Street site if Mr. Chen agreed to permit MAHC to release all joint communications to the public regarding 1975 Muskoka Beach Road. I sought Mr. Chen’s agreement to this proposal, and he promptly accepted in writing to Ms. Miller on March 22, 2024. Shortly thereafter, however, Ms. Miller retracted her offer, citing alleged advice from the Ministry of Health against releasing the information. This continued MAHC’s non-disclosure policy.
14. Mr. Chen of Muskoka Royale Development Inc. has consistently stated that the USI/Stantec report suggests leveling the hill at the Pine Street site for construction would cost MAHC between $50 million and $180 million before any building could commence. Although MAHC initially disputed this claim, it was finally addressed during a meeting I attended on July 22, 2024, with Chair David Uffelmann, CFO Alasdair Smith, CEO/President Cheryl Harrison and two others Board members.
When questioned, Mr. Smith insisted that this estimate was not included in the Stantec report. He later, however, conceded that the Urban Strategies Inc. and the Stantec engineer responsible for the report had indeed verbally confirmed the accuracy of Mr. Chen’s estimate of $50 – $180 million to prepare the grounds.
Mr. Smith downplayed this concern, stating that MAHC does not intend to fully prepare the site for future construction. They would only spend the amount needed for the current design for thirty-one beds, short of the 46 beds currently designated. Notably, MAHC is currently exploring the purchase of adjacent land to ensure enough space for the hospital without needing to fill the large pit on the selected site at 300 Pine Street.
By withholding this crucial financial information, MAHC has severely impeded informed decision making among political leaders and the public. This lack of transparency also hampers the Ministry of Health’s ability to accurately evaluate the suitability of the Pine Street property for future involvement. The potential costs associated with developing the land for future hospital expansions, including medical residences, research facilities, and daycare, would be prohibitive, yet MAHC has failed to disclose this critical aspect of their land selection process.
In recent discussions, MAHC indicated that it would not invest between $50 million and $180 million on the proposed site. Instead, they plan to allocate approximately $30 million to prepare the land for a plan that currently involves a configuration of thirty-one beds. This approach appears to prioritize the limited size of the property over the actual needed beds for the community.
15. Furthermore, the existence of a tall rocky hill and a large pit with a variance of 30 meters (100 feet) renders proper development of 300 Pine Street exceedingly impractical. This raises questions about whether this site, intended to be donated by the Town of Bracebridge, should truly be considered the preferred option since it still requires additional properties to be purchased to join with 300 Pine Street to meet Ministry standards of land.
16. It is unrealistic to believe that MAHC is acquiring additional adjoining properties, including a northern parcel from the Catholic District School Board, for the proposed Bracebridge Hospital.
At the same meeting, MAHC mentioned they are exploring the possibility of securing part of J.D. Lang Park to the south to address the lack of building space at Pine Street taking parkland from our citizens. To my knowledge, the community is not aware of any request from MAHC to utilize our parkland for the hospital’s construction.
17. Additionally, I was shocked to hear Mr. Smith, the CFO, proposed that MAHC might seek a license to operate a landfill at the Pine Street property to fill in the large pit for future development. He claimed this could help address Muskoka’s landfill shortage!
This is alarming to suggest constructing hospital facilities on land that could contain mixed, unstable, landfill materials. This huge lack of transparency underscores serious concerns about the measures Muskoka Algonquin Healthcare is considering. It highlights the unsuitability of the Pine Street site and raises significant worries about potential financial burdens on taxpayers, both now and for future generations. Such misleading proposals fail to acknowledge the true inappropriateness of the Pine Street site due to its large pit.
18. MAHC asserted that the cost of providing utilities, services, and roads to the 1975 Muskoka Beach Road site would be significantly higher for taxpayers than servicing the 300 Pine Street (Fowler Site). Contradictory information was provided by Mr. Donald Currie, the former head of the Bracebridge Water and Sewer Department, who managed the amalgamated District Water and Sewer Department until his retirement. He stated that developing the Pine Street site would actually be much more expensive than the Muskoka Beach Road location, estimating that preparing Muskoka Beach Road could cost as little as one-quarter of what would be required for the Pine Street site. What study has MAHC procured of this matter and not released, also for transparency?
19. MAHC has claimed that the railway overpass limits ambulance access to the Muskoka Beach Road site. This information is also erroneous; the issue can be alleviated by constructing a planned access road to the hospital located 300 meters to the north on Hwy 118 W which had already been investigated. Additionally, the Bracebridge Westerly By-Pass will greatly enhance access to the Muskoka Beach Road hospital site for residents in the western areas of the MAHC region.
20. There are concerns by EMS personnel about emergency vehicle access to the Pine Street site via Depot Way. Emergency responders would have to navigate past entrances to several major businesses, including Home Depot, Tim Hortons, and Walmart, as well as numerous smaller establishments. This area is already congested, which could impede emergency response times. Moreover, the second entrance on Pine Street runs through a residential neighborhood, also posing potential risks for emergency services.
21. Muskoka Royale Development Inc. has offered to donate land valued at $10 million for the hospital site at Muskoka Beach Road, in addition to a Mr. Chen’s $10 million cash donation for the Bracebridge facility. Mr. Chen is also willing to purchase the Pine Street property, alleviating the Town of this financial responsibility. In exchange, Mr. Chen hopes to benefit economically from the hospital’s construction on his land.
I share this information transparently, so citizens understand that such land donations are common among developers in local communities. Similar precedents in Bracebridge have included land donations by Mattamy Homes for the high school location. More recently, land contributions for the arena and library were made in by developers and business people.
Recommendations:
I outline some key recommendations and comments that I urge Bracebridge Council to consider:
1) The current recommendation for the preferred hospital site at 300 Pine Street in Bracebridge should be immediately rescinded.
2) A thorough investigation should be undertaken of the financial implications related to site preparation at Pine Street in order to determine the true and full costs of the Pine Street location. Will future construction for various associated medical needs be scuttled by the land limitations at Pine Street? Are there sufficient lands available also for recommended growth by the Ministry of Health ensuring commercial and residential areas nearby?
3) Mr. David Murray, Medcura consultant asked for my opinion of where an alternative hospital site might be located instead of 300 Pine Street. I advised him that 1975 Muskoka Beach Road site (Muskoka Royale Development Inc.), should be recognized as an acceptable alternative because:
(1) It was the original preferred site by MAHC
(2) The property would be provided at no expense to the Town – Donated value – $10 million (3) An additional $ 10 million dollars to be donated by owner, Mr. George Chen
(4) Mr. Chen would purchase the Pine Street site from the town alleviating all costs to Bbdg citizens with substantial savings for the Town, providing the town to have the full amount to donate back into the fair share portion.
(5) A separate land donation at Pine Street for a future park would become a reality. (6) It was preferred by the former Gravenhurst Council,
(7) MAHC has already canvassed all of Bracebridge for any other suitable sites with none contemplated.
4) Lastly, I point out that the savings of between $50 – $180 million dollars for not leveling part of the hill would result in a saving of a minimum $100 million dollars. Construction of these additional hospital beds in a new build is $2.5 million per bed. This saving alone by not developing Pine Street, equates into the cost of forty beds. Why is MAHC insisting upon utilizing a totally inappropriate piece of property to build our hospital, wasting millions of dollars?
I ask that Bracebridge Town Council please investigate this property acquisition and where required, rectify these serious flaws that MAHC has created.
Best regards,
Bruce Kruger
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 three times per week!
Click here to support local news
So hard to understand why all this information cannot be shared. It certainly looks like there is much not shared. No organization that is spending our taxpayer money should be hiding relevant information . That is why we think of our system as democratic, not totalitarian. Our government reps at all relevant levels are honest clear thinking folks. Why is this slipping through? Are they really letting so many $ millions just slip through the cracks. Impossible to believe. So ?
Wow, what a long winded rant. If it takes that much to make your point, I suspect the validity, of your point, or in my view, your opinions.
In my opinion, the Pine street choice is the best location for all of Muskoka.
Gord Darke
Baysville
Another example of how MAHC seems to be hiding something. So much is not being openly viewed /dismissed easily and yet no real change. Are we being played by MAHC so Huntsville will be the end result and Bracebridge eventually closed.
Time we had honest open disclosure of what is really going on.!
The above ‘analysis’ by John Kruger is deeply flawed and self-serving. The Beach Road site is part of and adjacent to a major Provincially Significant Wetland. That alone makes it a no go.
Let’s keep the lobbyists and developers out of this process.The needs of Bracebridge are best served by the chosen and paid for Pine Street site. We don’t need self interested developers telling us stories and making questionable deals to overturn the existing choice that best serves the interests of the TAXPAYERS and RESIDENTS OF BRACEBRIDGE and MUSKOKA.
Dishonest,non transparent, belittling,coercive are just a few of the words that come to mind about how MAHC has acted in this process. Right from suggesting 14 beds to site selection their actions have been self serving – not in service to the South Muskoka community. I’m sure I’m some backroom they’re doing spin control regard regarding this insightful letter.(Probably paying for it too!) Projects like this always go over budget, but going in knowing this will be a major hurdle before the building is even started is willful stupidity!
Mr. Kruger you are not alone in wondering why MAHC would say the PINE STREET PIT is the best choice for a new hospital. Everyone including the MAHC board knows the Beach Road site is superior to the PINE STREET PIT! All the people from Sundridge to the Severn River will pay too much money for site work if THE PINE STREET PIT site is used. MAHC has still never shown any real reason why our existing hospital can’t be renovated and added on too. If our existing hospital is renovated and added on to, we wouldn’t need to discuss new site selection.