Douglas County upholds design review for Elks Point ‘glamping’ project but adds event-management requirement

The Douglas County Planning Commission on July 14 voted to deny an appeal of the county's conditional design-review approval for a 53-space developed campground near the Elks Point Road/Highway 50 intersection, but added an extra condition requiring the applicant to submit a plan for how events such as weddings will be conducted on the event lawn and in the clubhouse.

G and T Properties, the neighboring owner represented by attorney Samantha Vanillo of Womble Bond Dickinson, appealed the county planning staff's design-review approval for Major Design Review DP25-1184, arguing the project is misclassified, contains permanent lodging units and amenities inconsistent with the county's developed-campground standard, and lacks adequate analysis of traffic, parking, environmental effects and emergency access.

Vanillo told the commission that the project includes 53 lodging units described in project materials as a mix of 18 domes (seasonal), nine "tree houses," and 26 sleeping shelters, plus a clubhouse, a commercial kitchen and an accessory dwelling unit intended to house up to nine employees. She said the record shows a number of material inconsistencies — an ADU exceeding county limits in the TRPA record, differences between TRPA and county parking counts (59 vs. 67 required), a traffic study that used the wrong county code standard, a lack of operational noise analysis for events, and removal of roughly 280 mature trees (about 60% of the site). "This project simply isn't a campground," Vanillo argued, saying in her view the development resembles a boutique resort.

County staff (Linda Doherty, Community Development) and the district attorney's office told the commission that the county must make independent design-review findings even when TRPA has determined the land-use category, and staff recommended that the county may affirm, modify or reverse its prior approval based on the design-review findings in Douglas County Code 20.614.040. Staff also noted the applicant's packet includes a professional forester review for tree removal and that TRPA had already approved the land use. Staff acknowledged a traffic consultant had used the wrong county standard in an earlier draft but said a correction was submitted showing an intersection level of service of D (the applicable standard for NDOT/County-maintained roads in the basin context).

Applicant counsel Lou Feldman said the project responds to regional demand for elevated camping experiences and that the materials reviewed by TRPA and county staff support the design-review approval. Feldman added that any external guests for events would be shuttled from other accommodations to reduce direct traffic impacts. "There is no intention to have this be an event center or a, you know, significant wedding venue," Feldman said; he added the site is intended for glamping and accessory events only.

After extended questioning from commissioners about traffic, parking, event operations, the accessory-dwelling unit sizing, flood-zone designation and site access, Commissioner Walder moved to uphold the conditional approval and to add a condition requiring the applicant to submit a plan describing how events such as weddings using the event lawn or clubhouse will be managed; the motion was seconded, amended to require the applicant (rather than the facility) to submit the plan, and passed on an affirmative vote. The commission also voted earlier that the appellant had standing to appeal.

The new events-management requirement was added to address the commissioners' concerns about potential future changes in operational use and to give planning staff material to review for consistency with design-review findings and public-safety requirements. The county's approval remains conditioned on the items in the staff report; the applicant must supply the events-management plan and satisfy any additional conditions before later construction permits and site-improvement permits proceed.

Key contested items raised in the hearing that remain subject to later review include traffic mitigation and access design, final parking layout, detailed drainage and erosion controls, the exact size and configuration of the accessory dwelling, and Forest Service permitting for tree removal. The commission discussed the option of returning the matter for further study but decided the record supported upholding the design review with an added condition to tighten operational controls on events.

The commission's action preserves the county's ability to require specific project-level mitigation at later permitting stages while allowing the project to proceed through the design-review pathway.