Wagoner County denies rezoning request for 48-site RV park in District 3

The Wagoner County Board of Commissioners voted unanimously June 2 to deny a proposed zoning change that would have allowed an RV park on a 16‑acre parcel west of State Highway 69 and south of West 90th Street in District 3.

County Planning and Zoning staff told commissioners the applicant, Julius Patton, requested rezoning of roughly 8.64 acres to C‑4 commercial for operation of an RV park; the remaining acreage would remain residential. Planning staff recommended denial. Commissioners cited concerns raised during public comment about sanitation, water supply, traffic and compatibility with surrounding residential uses.

Residents who live near the site urged denial. Candy Stein, a recent purchaser of property adjacent to the parcel, said she and her family bought the land intending to build a single‑family retirement home and were alarmed to learn the applicant sought an RV park. “Forty‑eight trailers in one place is a lot,” Stein said, adding she feared impacts to peace and property values. Clark Curtis, who owns five acres to the east, described chronic flooding on nearby land and said local water lines are already strained. “There are days we have no water,” Curtis said. Several other nearby homeowners warned of decreased property values, increased traffic, and insufficient local infrastructure for short‑ and long‑term RV occupancy.

Applicant Julius Patton said the development would be owner‑operated, with his family living on site to provide oversight. Patton also said any wastewater lagoon would be designed and certified to meet state Department of Environmental Quality standards. “You can’t just put a lagoon out there,” he said, adding that detention and DEQ certification would be required.

Commissioner Tim (first name not specified in transcript) moved to disapprove the zoning amendment, citing that an RV park was “out of character” for the area. Commissioner Randy Stamps seconded the motion. A roll call recorded Stamps, Kelly and Hanning voting “Aye,” and the motion to deny passed.

The county record shows staff had received letters of opposition and that the Planning Commission had not formally recommended approval because it lacked a quorum at its meeting the prior week. The applicant and opponents were told they may reapply or pursue other locations; no final plat or building permit had been issued or approved at the time of the vote.

The denial leaves the property zoned as it was before the application; the record includes residents’ written objections that county staff circulated to the commissioners.

Votes at the meeting on this item were recorded as: motion to disapprove by Commissioner Tim (mover), second by Commissioner Randy Stamps; outcome denied (3–0).

The Board moved next to other zoning and county business following this vote.