Oasis Grove gets a conditional permit for expansion
By Sharon McLeay Times Contributor
Some people think it is better to ask forgiveness than ask for permission. This applied to one application discussed in Wheatland County’s municipal planning commission meeting on Sept. 10.
Oasis Grove Campground re-applied for a development permit for an additional 64 campsites, a revised site plan, including a dog run, campsites, golf holes and a redesign of Hole 9.
They applied for a permit in 2017 for the expanded sites, but the permit expired before conditions were met.
“The landowner continued to develop the 64 sites and open them to RV camping in 2019,” stated Megan Williams, planner for Wheatland County. “The county issued a stop order on June 27, 2019, to start enforcement on the unauthorized development. In response to the stop order the landowner submitted a development permit application on July 12 that was deemed incomplete. County staff requested additional information, which was submitted on Aug. 7.”
The permit limited the sites to overnight and day camping. Developers had partial water and wastewater construction done and intend to provide 50-amp power to the 64 sites. County inspections have not been done on partial work.
Alberta Transportation was asking Oasis Grove to put in a T-type intersection because the campground is situated along a major roadway. No word from Alberta Transportation has been received yet. Staff stated that there might be softened intersection requirements if approved by Alberta Transportation. The commission members asked that approval from Alberta Transportation be included in the conditions.
The 2017 application had an emergency service plan, but it was requested that a more complete plan be required.
“I prefer if this is going to go through that there be a full emergency response plan because they will not handle a major fire in that area,” said Wheatland County Councillor Ben Armstrong.
Staff amendments included the condition of an emergency response plan to the satisfaction of the county.
Staff received two support letters for the application, one letter stating unpaid work forced a lien placed on the property, and several objection letters were submitted from adjacent landowners.
“The other road (Twp. 230) is where I am getting a lot of complaints,” said Councillor Donna Biggar.
The concerns were about increased traffic and dust control. The county did a traffic count, and it averaged 352 vehicles southbound and 128 vehicles northbound per day.
Armstrong said if the permit is approved, traffic counts will rise and there should be some provisions made. He considered the campground is close to Calgary, so many people might camp all summer and commute to work daily.
“Our policy in land-use bylaw allows for dust abatement as a condition of the development permit application,” said Mike Ziehr, Wheatland County’s general manager of transportation and agriculture. Ziehr added that landowners pay for the calcium used and then the county equipment operators spread it.
A request was made for wider areas of dust abatement to include major surrounding roads as part of the permit conditions.
There was a discussion on possible paving. Staff said the county does not currently have a paving requirement based on traffic counts and felt it would be too high a cost for applicants to bear. Deputy Reeve Glenn Koester said the road could eventually be considered for the paved roads list.
Reeve Amber Link questioned what could be done to address neighbouring landowner concerns.
“What I am mainly concerned with is that the interface of neighbouring uses should be a key component when considering the appropriateness of a site for proposed campground development,” she noted. “Just looking at some of the adjacent ratepayer’s concerns – and I looked at the conditions very carefully – I wonder if there are any conditions that would help mitigate those landowner concerns.”
She noted that people were concerned about garbage, maintenance, traffic and stray golf balls from the golf course. It was considered that this could be an issue dealt with through county bylaw officers.
Councillor Tom Ikert questioned the current track record of the applicant and their delays in meeting conditions. He questioned if there were penalties for non-compliance.
“I am seeing nine violations prior to construction, and prior to occupancy, and prior to construction and occupancy,” said Ikert.
Staff ensured Ikert there are financial penalties that can be levied through the bylaws if necessary and guaranteed they would monitor the ongoing work at the site.
The board approved the development permit with the amendments.