MD OF BIGHORN – An appeal against a 17,000-square-foot single-detached home near Gap Lake was denied by the MD of Bighorn’s Subdivision and Development Appeal Board.
The March 3 decision from SDAB put to rest whether the large home would move forward after nearby Howling Dogs Tours brought forward concerns that if a noise complaint was received about its business, it could threaten their kennel licence that they have had since 1994.
Rich Bittner, in a letter to SDAB, stated there was a worry the occupants of this new dwelling could find the noise to be an issue.
“If a complaint is issued, we risk losing our development permit and kennel,” Bittner stated.
He added in more than 25 years of operation, they had never had a noise complaint.
In SDAB’s decision to deny the appeal, they cited they had to look at the current context of the application.
“The intention to apply for a development permit does not create a crystallized right on which to base a refusal of a current proposal,” SDAB’s decision stated. “The Board must look at the current context of the application, not at what might happen in the future.”
The SDAB decision added any future applications by Howling Dogs, or any other kennels in the area, would have to be evaluated at the time those applications are made.
Bittner was not looking to stop the building of the dwelling, but rather asked for a restrictive covenant that covered the noise from the kennels for as long as the kennels were in operation. On his property, there are 167 dogs, while a kennel next door, Sled Dog Operations, has 100.
“By placing the development within that zone, we would like some safeguards put in place for us,” said Bittner.
The SDAB decision referred to its previous statement regarding future impacts when it came to noise complaints.
“The evidence before the board was that noise within a reasonable level coming from Howling Dogs’ operation would not reach the subject site,” the decision stated. “Howling Dogs disputed the standard put forward by the applicant for noise levels but did not provide an alternate standard for the Board to consider.”
Bruce Nimmo, the owner of Bairn Corporation and the applicant for the development, said at the February hearing he has owned the property for 20 years.
“I have spent time on it in the summer,” he said. “I would camp on it with my children.”
He noted, though, he was not looking to impact the kennels with the development.
“I am quite empathetic to someone who wants to come forward and protect their business,” Nimmo said. “I don’t want to get in the way of someone who has a small business running a kennel. I am very happy to find a solution for all properties.”
In addressing other concerns, such as traffic, SDAB stated it found no evidence to satisfy the board that the proposed highway would not safely accommodate the traffic generated by the proposed dwelling.
“It is not enough to simply raise a concern,” the SDAB decision stated. “The board must base its decision on evidence brought before it.”
