The Mountain View County subdivision and development appeal board has heard an appeal of an earlier approval of a development permit for a caretaker/manager dwelling in the Eagle Hill-Westward Ho rural community.
The appeal hearing was held in council chambers on Sept. 13.
On Aug. 1 the municipal planning commission approved the permit for the proposed dwelling north of Highway 27 on Rge. Rd. 44 and Twp. Rd. 44.
The proposed dwelling will be approximately 900 square feet and will be located north of the nearby recreation resort area, along the northeasterly portion of the quarter section.
It will be used as a year-round, on-site residence for the owners of the golf course to provide caretaking and security services for the (nearby) resort and golf club, the applicant said.
The applicant indicated that the main reason for the house is “so we can move to the area and the location was selected as I can supervise the RV park traffic and supervise activity between the park and the cemetery. I have services close by and I can control the gate easily.”
The Eagle Valley Cemetery Board launched the appeal of the earlier permit approval. In the notice of appeal the board cited three main reasons for the appeal:
• Adjacent landowners were not notified of this discretionary development permit as required in the land use bylaw prior to the decision.
• Neither was the development permit application announced in the local newspaper for two weeks prior to the decision being made as required by the land use bylaw.
• The development permit places the dwelling within 39.4 feet of the adjacent property line (cemetery fence), which is within the 100-yard required setback.
In a letter accompanying the appeal, the board stated, in part, that, “We note that the dwelling allows for year-round occupancy although the campground is only to be open seasonally. This discretionary development permit is very vague and confusing based on the definition of a dwelling as a permanent residence mixed with caretaker/manager building, which is involved in the specific commercial use, i.e. running the campground.”
During the hearing, Division 6 county councillor Peggy Johnson spoke as a resident in support of the appellant.
“We’ve worked very hard to keep it a place of park-like serenity and we are working very hard to maintain its quietness and its private-ness,” said Johnson. “We are adamant about trying to maintain a visual barrier and a noise barrier between the cemetery and the RV park.
“The 100-yard setback is to maintain the quietness of the cemetery and the visual barrier so people can go there and grieve in private.”
Anne Maclin also spoke in support of the appellant.
“I think the community is very, very concerned,” said Maclin. “There has been a lot of pressure on the community.”
No letters in support of the appellant were received by the board, members heard.
In a letter to the board submitted in response to the appeal, the applicant said, in part, “We feel the location of the dwelling is very appropriate and mitigates many concerns the board has. We feel the board is trying to take more land use away from us on top of the setback agreed to several years ago.
“They have been unwilling to compromise on any points despite our best efforts to be willing to compromise with them.”
Applicant David Bach spoke during the hearing. He said he is prepared to take steps to ensure noise and sight concerns are addressed.
“We can’t accept doing nothing with our land,” said Bach. “I don’t know how they are being impacted by my house on that hill. I don’t see any negative impacts and I didn’t hear any today.”
Applicant Ted Bach said he is prepared to work with the cemetery board to address concerns.
“We’d like to make things right,” said Bach. “This building adds great security to the RV park and the cemetery.”
No letters in support of the applicant were received by the board, members heard.
The board must release its decision on the appeal no later than Sept. 28.
