Resort approval appeal denied

The Mountain View County subdivision and development appeal board has denied an appeal of the prior approval of a recreational resort campground development at the Forest Heights Golf and Country Club northeast of Sundre.

On June 7 the county’s municipal planning commission (MPC) approved the development permit for the development.

The property involved is located approximately 10 kilometres north of Highway 27 on Rge. Rd. 44 and Twp. Rd. 340.

The subject land was zoned Parks and Recreation District in 1992, which, as per the county’s land use bylaw, allows for both golf courses and recreational resort (campground) use.

The total developed area for the campground would be 13 acres in the northeast corner of the subject property.

A maximum of 50 people would be allowed on the site, the applicant said, adding that creating the new sites could cost about $175,000.

On June 19 Douglas McCullough and Frank Greif appealed the June 7 development permit approval, citing a number of reasons, including the following:

• That the approving authority failed to properly consider the factors established by several sections of the land use bylaw in the determination of the appropriateness and suitability of the site for the proposed campground development.
• That the approving authority failed to give proper consideration, or any, with regards to its prior decision wherein it limited its discretion in approving a re-designation (of the property) from agricultural district to recreation facility district for the stated purpose to recognize the existing golf course and to permit the applicant to continue developing the golf course as planned.
• The approving authority failed to properly consider the provisions of the Eagle Valley Area Structure Plan.

The appeal board’s decision on the appeal was released on Aug. 7 and came before the municipal planning commission as information at the commission’s recent regularly scheduled meeting in council chambers.

The appeal board decision itself came following a hearing on July 24 in council chambers.

In its Aug. 7 ruling, the board cited 10 reasons for its decision to deny the appeal, including the following:

• The board determined that the previous condition requiring a 100-yard buffer between the adjacent cemetery and the proposed development minimizes the impact of the proposed development with the current footprint as well as to allow for cemetery expansion, and should therefore be maintained.
• The board accepts the response from the director of cemeteries for Service Alberta that the proposed development has provided acceptable measures to mitigate concerns relative to the Eagle Valley Cemetery.
• The board determined that the proposed development is in accordance with the Mountain View County municipal development plan.
• The board accepts that the proposed development is an acceptable discretionary use within the parks and recreation district.
• The board determined that the proposed development is compatible with the purpose of the parks and recreation district.
• The board determined that the proposed development is in accordance with the intent and conditions of the Eagle Valley Area Structure Plan.
• The board determined that the proposed development complies with the regulations as outlined with the land use bylaw.

During its regularly scheduled meeting on Aug. 16 the municipal planning commission passed a motion accepting the appeal board decision as information. Councillor and commission member Peggy Johnson voted against the motion.