Skip to content

Qualicum Beach council split on Pheasant Glen development decision

Council approves permit for two buildings, after enviro, hydrological studies
13615227_web1_180919-PQN-M-PheasantGlenCouncil-sub-180919
These images, provided to Qualicum Beach staff, show the style of building that Pheasant Glen Golf Course requested a development permit to build. The plan is to build two such villas, each having 12 tourist accomodation units.— Carsten Jensen Architect image

There was no unanimity at Qualicum Beach council over a development permit decision for a relatively small piece of Pheasant Glen Golf Course lands.

At a council meeting on Monday, Sept. 17, staff recommended that council authorize a development permit for 1025 Qualicum Rd. for the creation of two buildings with 12 units each for tourist accomodation, but only once a complete hydrological assessment and environmental report were submitted.

The decision passed after plenty of discussion, with Mayor Teunis Westbroek and councillors Bill Luchtmeijer and Neil Horner for, and councillors Barry Avis and Anne Skipsey against.

Resort development has been the plan for the site, located West of Qualicum Road and South of Nenzel Road, since 2005, when a portion of golf course property was approved for removal from the Agricultural Land Reserve for the purpose of building a comprehensive destination resort, according to a staff report.

The town approved the proposal in 2005, which included 225 tourist accomodation units, a restaurant, clubhouse, conference centre, spa and more.

The proposal that council approved Sept. 17 was for a small portion of the site, and only for two buildings.

The two buildings represent a change from previous plans that showed the location would include smaller buildings with four units of accomodation each.

Avis called the buildings “like two large apartment buildings, which is quite different.”

The staff report notes the villas are within the permitted maximum height of nine metres, and within the permitted floor area ratio.

Skipsey said her concerns were for the hydrological and environmental reports, which she said should be available to council before a decision is made on granting a development permit.

Avis agreed.

“We seem to be rushing this,” said Avis.

“And it’s not as if I don’t favour this. I think we do need resort accommodations in this town. I think clustered around the golf course is good, but I do believe we should do it in a proper step manner and I’m thinking we’re missing a little bit of the process, so that concerns me.”

Of concern is the headwaters of Beach Creek, which are located in the area of the site.

Westbroek noted that the plan has been that Beach Creek must be protected, and said that’s still the plan, but added he believes that approving a permit subject to having studies done “is reasonable,” noting (as did Luchtmeijer) that requiring more and more studies from developers with no assurance of getting a development permit has killed projects in the past.

Council had previously refered the development permit application to the Advisory Planning Commission.

The commission recomended “that the development permit application… be refused and further that council require the applicant to provide an update master plan, environmental report and form and character guidelines.

Fox McKinley, a Qualicum Beach resident who lives near the golf course said he was “astounded” that three members of council “rushed to judgement” on this, noting the APC’s decision.

He added “the whole process started 13 years ago and should be left up to the next council… to have the opportunity to review this applicaiton and make their own informed decision.”