The Supreme Court has pronounced a verdict in favor of the Peace River Regional District (PRRD) in a protracted judicial review involving a Pouce Coupe (British Columbia, Canada) couple operating an unpermitted campground, setting a new precedent for land use regulations.
Lyle Pringle and Doreen Shadow found themselves embroiled in a legal dispute with the PRRD after they were found operating an unpermitted campground on their property situated at 437 Briar Ridge Road.
The land, hosting 22 recreational vehicle (RV) sites, a food truck, washroom facilities, a rental shack, workshops, a convenience store, a restaurant, and other business-oriented facilities, was designated within the Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR).
Justice Shelley C. Fitzpatrick, overseeing the case, highlighted in her ruling that the couple seemed to sidestep the restrictions imposed by the land’s agricultural zoning and district bylaws. She noted that the couple had “sought to avoid the consequences arising from the fact that the Property was in the ALR and that certain zoning and building bylaws applied.”
The couple’s predicament provides a critical learning opportunity for private campground owners and operators.
They must ensure that they fully comprehend the zoning bylaws and regulations governing their land before embarking on any form of development. This incident underscores the importance of due diligence in understanding property zoning designations before implementing business operations, particularly when those operations involve significant alterations to the property.
Interestingly, Pringle and Shadow were not aware of the ALR status of their property when they purchased it. They harbored ambitious plans for the site, including the establishment of a cultural center, a community garden, and a retail outlet for First Nations crafts.
However, the PRRD had earmarked several structures on the property for removal, including electrical and sewer infrastructure, to align with zoning bylaws.
The couple claimed that once they learned about the ALR status, they ceased all development activities linked to the campground and their business venture.
The legal implications of this case are particularly significant for other private campground owners and operators.
The Supreme Court’s verdict emphasizes the rigidity and enforcement of zoning and land use regulations. These regulations are in place to ensure the preservation of agricultural land and prevent its misuse for non-farm or commercial purposes.
In a bid to circumvent the constraints imposed by the ALR designation, Pringle and Shadow sought exemptions from the Agricultural Land Commission (ALC) twice but were unsuccessful. The ALC maintained that the couple’s campground operation was not an approved use under the ALC Act and was established without the required ALC approval or PRRD building permits.
The Supreme Court’s verdict has left the couple facing bylaw penalties payable to the PRRD, along with the costs incurred by the regional district during the judicial review.