MOUNTAIN VIEW COUNTY – The county's subdivision and development appeal board has rejected an appeal of a development permit issued for a property southwest of Sundre.
The decision came following a hearing held on Nov. 13.
The original permit was approved by the municipal planning commission approving authority on Oct. 3. The permit is for a business, home based – contracting trucking and solid board fence.
The permit allows for two commercial vehicles to be kept on the property.
The applicant is Brad Carriere and the landowner is Stewart Brian. The property is located in the McDougal Flats rural neighbourhood off Twp. Rd. 323A at SW 20-32-5-5 and is zoned country residential.
The appellant, Rick Gogol, lives near the site. He cited several reasons for appealing the permit approval, including concerns with vehicle noise and with the fencing at the property.
Speaking during the appeal hearing, Gogol read from a prepared statement.
“The very idea of living in a rural subdivision is to enjoy peace and quiet and to escape the excessive noise associated with urban and industrial areas,” Gogol said. “The approval of this home-based business would be preventing the lifestyle intended by the nearby residents in the subdivision.
“It would also diminish the resale value of the property and make it unappealing for potential buyers.”
In a ruling issued Nov. 26 the board denied the appeal, citing four reasons for its decision:
• The board reviewed the necessary requirements contained within Section 10.5 of the Mountain View County Land Use Bylaw No. 16/18 that the proposed development of the home-based business is suitable for the lands as a business, home based is a discretionary use within R-CR country residential district.
• There was insufficient evidence to support how the proposed development of the home-based business will impact adjacent land users as there will be a reduction of commercial equipment that was previously housed on the lands. Only two commercial vehicles are permitted to be stored on the property in relation to a business, home based, and no outside storage.
• The conditions of the proposed development permit, noise and offsite impacts should be minimized. Should the proposed development of the home-based business not meet the
conditions of the development permit a complaint can be made.
• The board was not satisfied with the information provided, that the 12-foot solid board fence would not have a detrimental impact on the flow of water, or demonstrate how the fence will be removed as to not impede the flow of water during a flood event.
The appellant has 30 days to appeal the decision to the provincial Court of Appeal.
