Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Disability Accommodation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board denies year‑round driveway RV variance for family citing son’s traumatic brain injury
Summary
The Board of Zoning Appeals voted against a variance to allow a recreational vehicle to remain in a driveway year‑round for a family that said the RV provides an accessible private space for an adult son with traumatic brain injury and PTSD.
Jamie Roberts and Linda Jones petitioned the Board of Zoning Appeals on Oct. 25 for a variance from developmental standards to allow a recreational vehicle (RV) to be parked in their driveway year‑round at 5505 Billmore Street so their adult son could use it as private space to manage symptoms of traumatic brain injury and post‑traumatic stress disorder.
Linda Jones told the board the RV provides her son with a regulated private space and asserted that the arrangement has helped prevent hospitalizations. "He's 30 years old...He needs this," Jones said during a lengthy public statement describing her son's medical history, therapy and how the RV is used for short-term escapes and decompression. She said the family bought the vehicle specifically to support his needs and that he does not live full time in the RV.
Town staff and the fire department explained the ordinance's purpose: under current code recreational vehicles may be stored in driveways seasonally (April–October) so they are available for travel, but the code is not intended to allow routine use or on-site habitation when parked. Staff also noted the petitioners had sought a variance to depart from that standard; that is the specific matter before the board.
Board members discussed safety concerns raised by the fire department and the difficulty of setting an enforceable rule that would apply only to this household. The board considered a motion to approve a variance with stipulations (including removal if the son no longer needs the RV and a ban on overnight stays). The motion failed on a roll-call vote: two votes in favor, two abstentions and one no, so it did not meet the threshold for approval.
After the failed motion the board voted to dismiss the petition without a variance. The board and staff advised the petitioners that any alternative remedies (such as appeal to the town council or a different variance type) would follow normal procedures and that building, fire and safety standards remain applicable.
