
by JENNIFER ARGUE, Local Journalism Initiative reporter
Apr 12, 2022
Applicant and Developer Cameron Wyatt said their original development plans have changed due to listening to feedback from the RM and neighbours. He explained that he wants to build a low-density single-family home that he will resell—highlighting that being designated CR1 does not permit further subdivision. Heritage Branch had requested a second Historical Resource Impact Assessment (HRIA), which is underway. Wyatt further said he understood that the road would be negotiated through a service agreement further in the process.
Taking issue with the location of the access road, Pelican Point residents spoke about safety concerns for their residents and residents of the new development. They said the proposed access is located in the middle of a steep hill on the narrow road, which serves as the only access into the community. Concerns included blind spots on a steep incline that could be hazardous to vehicles and residents utilizing the road for walking, biking or quadding.
They asked the developer to reconsider its location.
Because the speed limit is 30km/hr, Councillor Garry Dixon suggested residents abide by it. One resident explained that it is a popular fishing destination, and people don’t always follow the rules.
There were 5 Letters of opposition from area residents and the Resort Village of Pelican Point. Concerns varied.
- Future use was not defined properly because the applicant had initially tried to get approval for a campground which would add pressure to the existing infrastructure.
- Concerns over environmental impact - first nations gravesites
- campsites - increase in trespassers and increased fire risk.
- There was also concern that it was a backdoor approach to additional subdivision development.
Wyatt responded to the concerns and answered questions. He said he picked the location because it would provide dual access to both parcels with minimal disturbance and thought it was safe. However, he said other options could be negotiated in the service agreement.
“We are trying to do minimal disturbance so putting a road all of the way up to the top is more disturbance. Is it doable? Absolutely, for sure it is. Safety is super important. We are not here to cause issues. We want it to be safe.” Wyatt also commented that he currently doesn’t have legal access to his quarter of land. He said he wants to find solutions that work for everybody.
Wyatt addressed the letter the Village of Pelican Point sent to community planning. He said their concerns were not relevant to the current rezoning application because the Village’s concerns were about the previous campground application.
“This is going on record today, me standing in front of Council saying we are not going ahead with that campground. That’s not happening at all. So any discussions around in my mind should be null and void because it’s not happening. What’s happening on this is exactly what’s in front of you today…what we do with the remaining 92 acres that are zoned agriculture we don’t know. We have no development plans today for that. I can guarantee you it will not be a long term seasonal RV resort.”
Reeve Bob Schmidt reminded the Council that Community Planning still needed to put their stamp of approval on the subdivision despite what the Council decided regarding rezoning. Some of the comments from the Council included - Councillors Gilbert, Arndt, and Romanyk voiced concerns about future development. Councillor Whitrow said they have similar accesses at Alta Vista and haven’t had any problems.
Councillor Gilbert said he has no problems with a person building a residence to enjoy the lake but had road concerns. Reeve Schmidt had concerns about the road, saying it was better to have direct access from a grid.
Councillor Labatte said she was ok if Wyatt compromised.
Chief Administrative Officer Brandi Morissette reminded the Council they had suggested rezoning to CR1 because there were more restrictions.
Second and third readings passed with Councillor Arndt the only no vote.
We reached out to the RM to ask them about the next steps in the process and clarify what the vote was approving. The CAO responded, “no comment.”
Note: These reports are abridged for content