Skip to content

Ruling on McDougal Flats-area development permit soon

subdivision appeal 1
Mountain View County subdivision and development appeal board members take part in the recent appeal hearing in council chambers. Dan Singleton/MVP Staff

MOUNTAIN VIEW COUNTY - The county's subdivision and development appeal board has until tomorrow to issue its ruling an an appeal of a development permit granted for a home-based business on property southwest of Sundre.

The board held an appeal hearing in Mountain View County council chambers on Nov. 13.

The permit was approved by the municipal planning commission approving authority on Oct. 3. The permit was for business, home based – contracting trucking and solid board fence.

It 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 13-foot-high 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 re-sale value of the property and make it unappealing for potential buyers.

“Another important factor that the county has to consider is that the business land location along with all the remaining residents in the subdivision, are located on a flood plain. It is felt that if there is another flood that the fence and possibly equipment would be swept directly into our yard, potentially damaging our house, outbuildings, vehicles and property.”

Three letters were received by the board in support of the appeal.

“My family and I noticed it (the fence) as soon as it went up, as we drive by the property several times a day,” one letter writer states. “As well, everyone that visits our place asks us as soon as they arrive ‘What is the structure down the road?’ I think they too are perplexed that this was allowed by the county.”

In a letter responding to that letter, the applicant said, in part, that, “I was given approval to build the fence which is not any different than wind breaks that ranchers put up to protect their livestock. It is built with removable panels so that if there is a flood it can be removed.”

The applicant also spoke during the appeal hearing. He said the fence was erected to screen the vehicles on the site and is removable in the event of flooding, he said.

In summary, the appellant said, in part, that, “If I wanted noise I’d go live in town. There is impact on us in the area. The fence is an eye-sore. This is a residential area.”

Also in summary, the applicant said, in part, that the fence could be removed if necessary.

The complete appeal package, including the letters and other documents, is available for viewing on the county’s website.





Comments