​​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 overnight in tents, RV's and Campers outdoors here back in 1983/1984 - well before the Niagara Escarpment Plan jurisdiction began in June 1985. 
 

Ontario case law on legal non-conforming rights should be the touchstone for this file. Standing jurisprudence including Supreme Court decisions establish precedent on legal none conforming land rights. These decisions outline that we have been proposing legal and policy compliant approaches while continually facing challenges.

Policies, laws and guidelines exist for efficiency, continuity, clarity and fairness.
Our public institutions need to uphold these established principles and offer accountability when these are ignored, misinterpreted, or denied.
 

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 did not have the financial capacity to weather 5 years of ongoing challenge against evidence to recognize 4 decades of documented history.

If the history of this land, statements of all involved, professional reports from respected legal minds, policy interpretation, and supporting decisions from the NEC and OLT is not enough to secure support for this project, what property or business is safe from facing a similar fate? 

Numerous other agritourism and land based initiatives are facing similar prosecution. When will something be done to support projects with low environmental impact which provide strong economic and cultural impact?

Accountability and Transparency matters.
We are advocating now for accountability to move towards better practices, legal land rights to be upheld, and for intentional entrepreneurs investing and growing in Ontario to be able to do their businesses and build opportunity without the Government creating roadblocks and policy chasms that swallow good projects and are sending all investments running from Ontario.

As of October 2026, we are losing more businesses than are being created.
That should scare everyone.
 

Our Experience with the planning process

Our conversation with the NEC began in February 2022 and our proposal to upgrade the aging facilities (which kicked off this whole caboodle) was first discussed with Senior Planning Staff in April of 2022.

Our inaugural Planning & Justification Report was filed in February 2023 including our professional legal review.

The group against us circulated a faulty petition stating untruths against us and our business in April of 2023.

Complaints were called in to the local bylaw as well as NEC compliance.

Local bylaw was called with complaints that we were ruining the ecology on our site by running an illegal campground with numerous RVs, structures and illegally run services across the property. They attended and found no evidence to support these claims and stated further complaints by that group would result in harassment charges. They shifted target and found willing participants to their campaign in NEC staff.

The 40 years of active use history as a retreat was well established in the NEC files, yet the NEC acted outside of their jurisdiction, their own judgement matrix, policy and law to levy a Notice Of Violation demanding the shutdown of all commercial activities on our land. No site visit was engaged and no evidence was presented to the NEC compliance officer to support this move. Our entire livelihood was shutdown and put in jeopardy on my birthday, May 17 2023.

Our first NEC Development Application was denied in July 2023 against policy and law due to the loud yet baseless complaints of the group against us.

Our file has been active through the tenures of 2 MPP's, 4 NEC Directors, 3 NEC Chairs, a couple handfuls of Commissioners, 2 Managers of Planning, and numerous Senior Planners. 

​

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.
 

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:

• Multiple permits were presented to the NEC (and denied) by the previous owners to expand their retreat use on the property in the early 1980's

• A 2000 staff report and brochure outlined the retreat’s services stating that there was extensive and ongoing commercial activity on the property. No actions were taken to shift the use or deny the retreat activities continuing.

• The previous owner stated that he had numerous site visits with NEC staff over his 40 years and that the NEC was well aware of the activities on the property.

• The property was listed for sale as a commercial retreat centre in 2007 with no objection. A real estate agent at that time provided a brochure advertising the Retreat Centres commercial activities and requested clarity on the property use. No change or concern was presented. The use continued.

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

Despite this, it took 3.5 years to confirm known, documented, active, ongoing commercial use on the property.

Our conversations with the NEC began in February 2022 before purchase to receive a Property Information Report. This was followed by preliminary discussions and a requested staff review of our initial plans April 2023. Further documentation and information was provided 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 neighbours presented concerning statements around preference for Christian guests and activities, claiming that our non religious use would harm the fabric of the community, lower property values, cause massive environmental concerns, and bring guests who would make neighbours unsafe and act in reprehensible ways. Though some Commissioners saw through the NIMBYism and bias, others did not and at the vote, our Development Permit was denied in a cloud of confusion. We very much planned to appeal this decision as the process was brought with bad actions from NEC staff.

Those same staff, along with the Director at the time, guided us away from engaging an Appeal and instead directed us towards a process they called Delegation to discuss our concerns about bias and staff missteps. We applied for delegation to the NEC Chair at the time, were granted Delegation by unanimous vote from the Commissioners, then days before presenting for Delegation, the NEC Director contacted me to say the very mechanism of Delegation they guided me towards did not actually exist for the function they told us it did. We were told that we were no longer able to appeal the faulty decision and properly question the major missteps against policy by the staff guiding us away from an ability to appeal, saying it was past the time allowed even though it was because of their mis-guidance that we missed the opportunity to appeal the decision. At our next round in front of the Commission in October 2023 we  presented an Existing Use focused Development Permit and ensured our evidence was fully considered.

In November 2023 the history of the retreat centre was confirmed as dating back to 1983 and confirmed by majority vote of the Commissioners as an Existing Use. This was then appealed by the group against us in December 2023 and sent to the OLT. After our win to confirm the Existing Use by the Commissioners, more complaints were made to NEC compliance against us in November 2023 and the same officer from the Spring went to the new interim NEC Director and in January 2024 the NEC escalated their Notice of Violation despite having no evidence, basis, legal or policy backup to do so. A new Development Permit to confirm a minor expansion to an Existing Use for 5 - 7 accommodation domes and a gathering dome was submitted to NEC staff in February of 2024 in response. That Development Permit would sit idle for more than 2 years.

We attended 6 Ontario Land Tribunal Case Management Conferences between March and July 2024, the Ontario Land Tribunal 5 day hearing took place in October 2024 after many months of dedicated research and preparation.

The OLT Decision on our case came through at the end of December 2024 which supported the NEC Decision confirming the Existing Use status of the property. The property was confirmed as a legal and compliant Existing Use dating back to 1983.
A Request for Review was submitted by the Appellants against that OLT decision in January of 2025. The answer from the OLT Chair finally came on May 13 2025 when the Request for Review was completely shut down as having no basis in truth or evidence. We were finally a recognized Existing Use.
 

However, for some reason, on June 1st 2025 the then Director Sean Carey, of the NEC, through guidance from the same staff we held valid, unanswered complaints about, ignoring the standing Development Permit Application to recognize camping and a supporting facility upgrade of dome camps, and ignoring the report from the Grey County Chief Building Officer stating that Sky Camp - our specialty dome camp - was compliant and built within all regulations and policy, decided to slap a 45 day Removal Notice for the entire dome camp stating that it needs a Development Permit to be recognized. While actively ignoring our Development Permit from February 2024 attempting to do just that.
We responded with an 84 page document again outlining our property rights and the legal and policy back basis for our business and approach. I was told by NEC staff and the current Director that our Development Permit would go before the Commission in September 2025.
The Director then told me to request a Delegation to discuss our plans ahead of that meeting so staff could clarify the approach with the Commissioners. Now, apparently, Delegation was a way to speak to the Commission about concerns. Odd that.

Staff are supposed to guide Commissioners on policy, law and evidence. They are not supposed to look to the Commissioners to tell them how to do their jobs. The staff member who had been complicit in the mistakes on our file from the get go stood in front of the Commission admitting that she did not have that understanding of the policies required to properly engage on the file. The Commissioners again expressed support for our file , with more than one stating that this seemed to clearly fall within this Existing Use decision already completed.

Delegation was 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 proposed a completely fabricated approach to consider the domes as an extension of the short term accommodations already recognized for the farmhouse and then proceed to provide a report that outlines how that approach is impossible.

All the permissions granted the property were connected to the land. Not contained within any structure, including the farmhouse The previous owner hosted camping activities for decades yet the NEC staff member wanted to ignore this to back up her false narrative and troubled approach on our file.

I, Alexis, continued to advocate for a proper application of policy and law, and eventually the NEC Director capitulated to putting a different planner on the file. That planner reviewed the policies and confirmed that the evidence and approach was within the expressions of the Niagara Escarpment Plan. That staff report went straight to the Director who now confirmed the Development Permit to approve our facility upgrades.

Within the allotted time period for review, the group against us again appealed the NEC decision, opening another Ontario Land tribunal process.
At the same time, the night before filing an appeal notice, one of the family members active in the campaign against us made false complaints to the OPP about myself, claiming I had attempted to run over two of their family members, pulling away at the last moment.

Problem for them - my car had not left my driveway all day in the town we had moved to 30 minutes away to free our family from their constant harassment. I was able to provide proof that these complaints were falsifications. The police would not charge the complainant with falsifying a statement to the police. I was told not to engage with any of those people. 

The next day, their appeals against us opened a new attack through the Ontario Land Tribunal and one of the appellants included the OPP complaints in an appeal letter to the OLT to smear our reputation. Despite those complaints being shut for having no evidentiary basis.

In February 2026 I provided a well backed and researched Motion To Dismiss.
The Appellants provided a response which ignored all requirements for a response which outline that a case is to be outlined, and instead promised that though they had no evidence to present at that time (4.5 years into their campaign against us), they would eventually present a case.

The Tribunal member overseeing our file ignored policy and law and overturned our Motion To Dismiss in April 2026.

The Appellants continued to push for a trial throughout May. After pressure from myself at our 9th Case Management Conference to present some semblance of a case, and a trial date being set, all of the 13 remaining appellants closed the 9 open appeals on the same day stating that they just didn't want to anymore. After holding up our legal and compliant business for 5 years.

On June 3rd, 2026, we were finally released from 5 years of hell.
It has been exhausting.

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.

What a load of absolute crapitude allowed, upheld and perpetuated by multiple government processes and driven by elitist NIMBYism from monied and connected 3rd parties acting against people instead of use.

​​

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.
 

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. 

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