Oklahoma RV Park Opposition Aired, But Council Gives OK

April 4, 2012 by   - () Comments Off on Oklahoma RV Park Opposition Aired, But Council Gives OK

The city council in Chickasha, Okla., has granted “use on review” or preliminary approval for an RV park in that city.

The council voted 6-3 in favor of the park on Monday (April 2), the Chickasha Express Star reported.

The park, proposed for Fourth Street and Almar Drive, drew plenty of opposition in this community of 15,000 located 30 miles southwest of Oklahoma City.

Chris Sims pointed out that in the original rezoning request on the tract of land, property owners in the area were told the rezoning was needed to allow the owner to construct a storage building on his land.

He and others urged the council to “go back to square one” on the rezoning and “get everyone’s input.”

“This is an easy fix,” he said.

David Thompson told the council that his mother-in-law who is moving to Chickasha had shown interest in houses for sale in the area, but her interest evaporated once she realized she might have an RV park for a neighbor.

Other residents along Almar Drive raised concerns that the street is too narrow and that the sewer infrastructure may not be adequate for the development.

“I hope you find it in the bottom of your heart to do the right thing,” Glenda Hamilton told the council.

Curtis Hart, owner of Muscle Car Ranch, questioned why the council would greenlight a new business that will hurt an existing business.

“Don’t let the profit of a few overcome the good of the city,” he said. “If you pass this, it is going to be a detriment to the entire city of Chickasha.”

The property owner, Glenn Snedeker, pointed out, “The people complaining today, if you stand on their porch, they can’t see my property.”

The council split 5-4 to vote down a motion by Chris Ferguson that would have approved the use on review with a stipulation that the entry and exit roads to the RV park be on 4th Street and not Almar Drive. Snedeker, however, pointed out that doing that would cost him $250,000 additional for road construction.

After voting down that motion, the council approved a second motion in favor of the use on review without the entry-exit stipulation.



Comments are closed.