​

Bubble Grove Nature Escape is more than just a property - it is the continuation of a decades-long legacy of hospitality and agritourism on the Niagara Escarpment.

Since the early 1980s, the site has served as a retreat centre, hosting thousands of visitors and contributing meaningfully to the local economy and community life.

Formerly known as Ridgewood Springs Farm & Retreat, the commercial use was well known by neighbours and documented in Niagara Escarpment Commission (NEC) files going back decades.

Yet today, Bubble Grove faces unprecedented opposition from a small group of neighbours and challenges from NEC staff simply for continuing the uses that have defined the property for over 40 years.
 

A Call for Fairness

From day one, we have attempted to work with the NEC to ensure an efficient and fair process grounded in planning policies, legal precedents, and land rights.

​

We have continually provided evidence of ongoing, extensive use of the property over decades. Legal precedent clearly states that open-air uses are attached to the land. The previous owners began hosting guests outdoors here in 1983/1984 - well before the Niagara Escarpment Plan jurisdiction began in June 1985. I was a just babe when this place first started hosting guests inside and outside for all sorts of activities.
 

👉 If they did it, so can we.
 

Ontario case law on legal non-conforming rights should be the touchstone for this file. All we are asking the NEC to do is follow the Ontario Supreme Court and established precedent in their guidance on legal noon conforming land rights.
 

Ontario law also clearly outlines that “people zoning” is illegal and violates the Ontario Human Rights Code. Agencies like the NEC should be the front line against bias and bigotry when it arises - every time, without exception. 

 

Projects based around sustainable business practices, regenerative land management, and positive community development need support from the ground up. Independent businesses do not have deep pockets for inefficient and convoluted planning practices. We do not have the financial capacity to weather 3.5 years to recognize 4 decades of documented history. if what we have provided is not enough to secure support from the get go, what property is safe from facing a similar fate? 

Accountability and Transparency matters.
All we are asking for is accountability to move towards better practices, our legal land rights to be upheld, and for us to be able to move forward without further unfair and escalating compliances actions where there has been zero negative impact claimed or shown.

We would like our Development Permit to go before the commission as our original version was discussed in June of 2022, a full development permit was put forward in February of 2023, a Notice of Violation was given with a demand to shut all business on the property on May 18 2023 with no site visit engaged, the Development Permit was denied in a cloud of confusion, we were guided away from Appeal and towards a Delegation to discuss our concerns about bias and staff missteps, we applied for delegation, were granted Delegation by unanimous vote, then days before NEC staff said Delegation wasn't a way to affect a decision so we couldn't have the Delegation anymore, then they wouldn't let us Appeal saying it was past the time allowed even though it was because of their mis-guidance that we did missed the opportunity to appeal the decision, then an Existing Use Development Permit was put forward in October 2023 (confirmed by NEC as an Existing Use in November 2023), appealed in December 2023 and sent to the OLT, more complaints were made against us in November 2023, in January 2024 NEC compliance escalated their Notice of Violation, a new Development Permit to confirm a minor expansion to an Existing Use for 5 - 7 accommodation domes and a gathering dome has been in the hands of NEC staff since February of 2024 in response, we then had 6 OLT case management conferences between March and July 2024, the Ontario Land Tribunal 5 day hearing took place in October 2024, the Decision came through at the end of December 2024 which supported our NEC Decision confirming the Existing Use status of the property, a Request for Review was submitted by the appellants in January of 2025 which could have resulted in a whole new trial, the answer came on May 13 2025 when the Request for Review was completely shut down, we were finally a recognized Existing Use, on June 1st the NEC slaps us with a 45 day Removal Notice for the dome stating that it needs a Development Permit to be recognized while they continue to sit on our Development Permit from February 2024 and with knowledge of our dome intentions since 2022, we responded with an 84 page document again outlining our property rights and request for our dome tents, I was told by NEC staff/ Director that our Development Permit would go before the Commission in September 2025, then was told to request a Delegation to discuss the domes ahead of that meeting in August, I reluctantly agreed despite not feeling comfortable but attempting to work collaboratively with staff, Delegation is delayed until September 2025 where staff propose to continue to ignore our land rights which should recognize the established activity of hosting open air accommodations out on the land as was practiced over decades by the previous owners, instead they propose to consider the domes as an extension of the short term accommodations recognized for the farmhouse and then proceed to provide a report that outlines how that approach is impossible. The Commission votes to support staffs motion and tell them to expedite our file to be seen sometime by February 2026. 4 years after our original approach to the NEC to confirm the ongoing use on the property.

If that run on description made you tired, yup. It is exhausting to consider the costs to ourselves as well as the Ontario tax payers who have funded this ongoing process against a very well documented, and now confirmed Existing Use, with ecological intentions and an open invitation to come experience the Escarpment.

 

Our Experience with the planning process

Our file has been with the NEC for 3.5 years. To acknowledge 40 years of documented use.
This file has been active through the tenures of 3 NEC Directors, 3 NEC Chairs, a couple handfuls of Commissioners, 2 Managers of Planning, and numerous Senior Planners.

We have been labelled as difficult and chastised for speaking up.

​

Meanwhile, the NEC has issued notices of violation, compliance demands, and even removal orders without a single site visit tied to any of those actions and despite 40 years of documented, compatible use and no evidence of negative impact.

Each time staff has set a bar to reach, and we meet their demands, they change the landscape. Not one promise has stuck. Not one day standing on stable sands.

This is nuts.
 

A Property Rooted in Hospitality

​

• Early Legacy (1980s): The retreat centre began under the Webers, who ran a Christian retreat centre before the Niagara Escarpment Plan was even in place (1985). Their use of open-air accommodations and programming predated NEC jurisdiction.
   

• Decades of Guests: Over 40 years, the Webers hosted 12,000 - 18,000 guests without any negative impact showing that this is very compatible use
   

• Published History: Norm Weber documented the property’s story in two published books, which remain part of the public record and are available for purchase on Amazon.
   

• Extensive Evidence: Property reports, brochures, guest lists, letters of support, and legal reviews all confirm decades of hospitality, retreats, workshops, events, and short-term accommodations.
   

The NEC’s own files confirm this history:

• A 2000 staff report and brochure outlined the retreat’s services.

• The property was listed for sale as a commercial retreat centre in 2007 with no objection.

• In 2022, our lawyer requested a Property Information Report. Drafted by the NEC’s Planning Manager, it listed the 2000 Development Permit which clearly outlines ongoing retreat use and stated no compliance issues existed.
   

Despite this, we are still fighting to continue the very same uses.

​

The Role of Religious Bias

The neighbour group opposing us has made numerous concerning statements, in person and in writing, that show their efforts are driven by:

• A preference for the decades of strictly Christian use.

• A clear distaste for our open and inclusive business model
   

Bubble Grove is a venue where all are welcome to connect with themselves, each other, and nature. 

It is bonkers to me that a small biased group have been given the opportunity to drag our business through years of challenge because they don't like who we are inviting? 

These folks introduced themselves to the NEC as “good Christians” and praised the “good Christian” owners and guests who had used this property for 4 decades. 

One even shouted out at the NEC meeting in October 2023 “If Existing Use is recognized, does that mean they can only host Christian events?”

That single statement lays bare the truth: this opposition is not about planning concerns - it is about bias, people zoning, and curating neighborhoods.

More words from these same folks:

“We had and still have a very close relationship with the previous owners” 

“They rented their farmhouse to Christian Churches to have retreats"

"The people attending would all walk the property or the roads without any disturbances”

“In summary: the Existing Use ‘business’ carried on [...] in the past, whether legal or not was from our vantage unobtrusive to the lives of anyone in the community, nor to the beautiful integrity of the Niagara Escarpment in which we live, work and revel” 

“They had people stay there in the farmhouse for week-end Christian retreats” 

“It was a Christian ministry that was their passion”

“We understood that these visitors had some kind of church connection.”

“the Retreat aspect of the property, whether legal or not, was unobtrusive to us and our community landscape. We assumed that their church friends helped with the apple harvest, reinforced their religious fellowship, and helped bolster meager farm revenues.” 

But our use is vilified?
They said our use will ruin the safety, ecology and property values of the neighborhood. We would cause floods and dead animals and unsafe roads.

They made falsified complaints and openly attacked our use while praising the 4 decades of religious use.

Why should our inclusive business face ongoing opposition, delays and negative outcomes for doing what the "good christians" have enjoyed doing for 40 years?

Your thoughts?

​

My thoughts are, there is no place for this kind of prejudice in land-use planning. Religion is very clearly outside the scope of planning processes. People Zoning is clearly outlined as a giant no no here in Ontario, and for good reason - planning should define how a space is used, not who uses it.

The NEC should have shut this down the moment the neighbours introduced themselves as “good Christians” before the Commission, and again when they did it at the next meeting, and again when they repeated their bias in letters to the NEC and the appeal letters to the Ontario Land Tribunal.
 

Incredibly, those same letters the appellants acknowledge decades of accepted retreat use with no negative impact, then claim our inclusive use will cause destruction, chaos, fires, flooding, lower property values, and moral decline.
 

This is dangerous and biased NIMBYism weaponized through bureaucracy, and no public agency should enable it or ignore that it happened.

Nothing changes if we can't speak about where processes stumble.  We should be protected from further interference and the original complaints against us should be investigated and charged if found to be falsified, as outlined in the NEP. Just cancel the original Notice of Violation, confirm the full scope of historic use on the property, and let me get on with my business, just as the previous owners enjoyed for their 40 years here. And it would be very nice if you could confirm our tents which allow us to continue to host groups without any request to expand the established level of use, in a way that has always been practiced on this property, in zero impact installations, and with best practices intended. We have been open to fair and flexible collaboration towards this proposal since the outset.

it is well documented, and in fact NEPOS just provided a presentation at the same September meeting, outlining that there are not enough places to camp adjacent to the Niagara Escarpment. Here we are saying this place has always done so and we are facing so. much. process.

We come with solutions, investment, good intentions, and business building capacity and our government is letting our business and property swirl into jeopardy while this planning process drags on towards a fourth year. 
 

The Core Issues​

• Vilification Despite Evidence: Every record shows safe, compatible use, yet enforcement escalates.

• Religious Bias & Double Standards: Neighbours prefer Christian-only use; NEC ignored bias.

• Accountability and solving issues created by mistakes of staff rather than ignoring them and gaslighting land owners asking for fairness and transparency

• Inconsistent, Escalating Measures: Violation notices and removal orders issued without cause.

• Existing Use Rights Ignored: Ontario law protects our uses; open-air accommodations are legally tied to the land and should be allowed to continue - we are happy to discus best practices, capacity and placement as we have requested from the get go
   

Why This Matters

Bubble Grove is:

• A legacy commercial property

• A place where food grows

• A beautiful natural landscape that should be open to all

• A hub for wellness and connection

• A longstanding contributor to the local economy

• A vision of positive economic and ecologic balance

• A dream, passion, deep love in action 
   

Supporting Bubble Grove means standing up for fair, unbiased governance, inclusivity in hospitality and agritourism, and the preservation of a decades-long legacy. Despite the obstacles, Bubble Grove continues to thrive forward offering immersive nature experiences while respecting history and the environment.
 

A Call to Supporters

We put this to you: What are your thoughts on the history, the process, and the evidence?

Should we sit down and stay quiet or is this worthy of conversation, accountability, and change?
 

We believe every time precedent is ignored and bias is allowed to continue, we must speak louder until something changes for the better.
 

👉 Add your voice to our petition : https://www.change.org/HelpBubbleGrove
👉 Support us through bookings and social shares.
👉 Stand with us for truth, history, law, and inclusivity.
 

We are resilient. We stand on evidence. We stand on history. 

We have decided to make public what is already part of public files and processes - all of the evidence and documentation in a handy dandy timeline on this page and photos and screen shots of all of it on the connecting page.

We think it is pretty clear. We leave it open to you to ponder, and if you are so stirred, maybe write your MPP or the Premiere, or the NEC or the Minister heading up the areas around this file.
 

Thank you for reading our story. We appreciate your time, attention, and support.

Alexis & Andrew