Skip to content

Appeal board hears Rosewood Resort's RV storage permit case

"The residents of Doyle Drive and adjacent landowners want our voices to be heard, understood and taken into consideration," said Niki Cameron
MVT Rosewood resort copy
An appeal was made of the decision approving a storage on the grounds of Rosewood Resort's existing 60-acre parks and recreation district property. Rosewood Resort Facebook photo

MOUNTAIN VIEW COUNTY - The county's subdivision and development appeal board (SDAB) has heard an appeal of an October approval for RV storage at Rosewood Resort south of Sundre.

The 220-minute hearing took place on Nov. 23 at the county office and online.

On Oct. 7 the municipal planning commission (MPC) approved a development permit for the proposed recreational vehicle storage at the site. 

The applicant and owner is Rosewood Resort and the land involved is located on the west side of Highway 760 immediately south of Doyle Drive.

The storage facility would be located on the grounds of the applicant’s existing 60-acre parks and recreation district property, which includes the 154-site Rosewood Resort seasonal campground.

The storage area would be grassed and as the remainder of the site already contains a fence and gate system it would not be fenced off. There would be 11 sites approximately 15 feet by 45 feet in size and will be required to be at least 24.5 metres from the northerly property line, members heard.

The approval comes with a number of conditions, including that all sewage holding taken in the recreational vehicle units be emptied prior to being placed in the storage area, and that camping and/or any residential occupancy is not permitted in any recreational vehicles within the identified storage area at any time.

The October permit approval was appealed by Niki Cameron on behalf of Doyle Drive residents and adjacent landowners with properties near the proposed storage site.

In a written submission to the SDAB, the appellant outlined reasons for the appeal.

“We do not feel that the municipal planning commission took into consideration all of the information that we provided for this case at their meeting of Oct. 7, 2021 and they did not facilitate a compromise between residents fo Doyle Drive and Rosewood Resort. We have concerns that we would like the appeal board to consider,” the submission states.

The notice of appeal outlined several areas of concern, including regarding security and boundaries, landscaping, storage access, and roadside development.

Regarding security and boundaries, the appellant states, in part, that, “As adjacent landowners we have respectfully asked for security fencing twice in writing and have been ignored . Additional storage will increase theft in the area and security at Rosewood Resort is currently inadequate.

“As important as security, we also want to be confident that Rosewood Resort will stay within the boundaries of their recreation vehicle storage area that they have been granted. We want security fencing to keep Doyle Drive safe.”

Regarding landscaping, the appellant states in part, “As adjacent landowners, in addition to eight foot chain link security fencing around the storage facility at Rosewood Resort, we want a landscaped buffer between the RV Park, storage lots, and Doyle Drive. We want to know the depth of trees, the layout of trees, and the landscaping plan, as it should have been part of the application process and available prior to the issuance of this permit. We want to make sure that this is planned out properly and enforced.

“We would like to work with Rosewood Resort to create a landscaping plan to create a buffer so we cannot see or hear the day to day operations of Rosewood Resort. This would mitigate another huge concern of ours.”

Regarding storage access, the appellant said in part that, “As adjacent landowners we want the wording changed so that there is no confusion about what is expected from Rosewood Resort. To us, ‘access’ means that people can not go into the storage area, but it does not clearly state that the storage area will be empty. We would like the wording changed in additional condition #21 that the recreational storage area will be empty between Oct. 16 and April 30.”

During the Nov. 23 appeal board hearing, appellant Niki Cameron addressed the SDAB, reiterating the points made in the written submission and reading aloud emails sent to the county regarding the matter.

She said landowners have concerns about the possible impact of any future fire at the storage site on nearby residents and residences.

“We feel this is a very dangerous area to be putting storage,” she said. “We want to feel safe and we want to feel secure. In conclusion we feel the MPC did not take into consideration all of the information that we provided for this case. 

“The residents of Doyle Drive and adjacent landowners want our voices to be heard, understood and taken into consideration. We live here. This is our community. We treat each other with respect. This affects our quality of life."

Several area landowners also addressed the board, voicing concerns with the possible impact of the storage facility.

County administration recommended that the permit approval be upheld.

Applicant Karen Sabo told the hearing she believes the storage facility would not negatively impact residents or landowners.

“We have been working diligently with the county to provide all that was required,” she said. 

She said she could support reducing the number of units permitted in the storage area to five.

Resort owners have been subjected to bullying by some area residents, she said.

“It is disheartening to live among such behaviour,” she said.

A decision by the SDAB should be released by mid-December.



Dan Singleton

About the Author: Dan Singleton

Read more



Comments