Terrebonne planning panel reviews proposed RV-park rules; agrees on key edits and next steps

Terrebonne Parish planning commissioners and staff met in a special informational session on Oct. 8 to review a draft set of regulations for recreational-vehicle (RV) parks. Participants discussed definitions, setbacks, health and septic requirements, site-plan standards and exemptions; commissioners and members of the public agreed on several edits and directed staff to return with revised text at a follow-up meeting.

The draft ordinance language under review is organized in a series of sections (for example, “Section 17‑01” and following). Planning staff and commissioners said they would keep the opening “purpose” language (Section 17‑01), remove or narrow proposed owner‑licensing language, and revise the definition of “RV park” so that the placement of two or more recreational vehicles on a single parcel will constitute an RV park rather than the earlier threshold shown in the draft.

Why it matters: the changes affect when a property moves from being treated as an individual household with an RV to being regulated as a park, which can trigger permitting, septic and public‑health requirements. Owners of smaller, family‑operated sites and residents living near existing parks pressed the commission to avoid rules that would be impractical or prohibitively costly; planning staff replied that the draft aims to protect public health and safety while minimizing undue burdens.

Discussion and guidance from the meeting

• Definition of “RV park.” Planning staff told the meeting that the draft will be revised so that “placement of two or more recreational vehicles for one’s own use on a single parcel…shall constitute an RV park.” That change was discussed repeatedly as a way to align parish definitions with how the Louisiana Department of Health and other state agencies treat temporary housing. The commission instructed staff to adopt the new phrasing for the next draft.

• Purpose language (Section 17‑01). Several commissioners and staff described the purpose paragraph as standard ordinance text that explains why the rules exist. The commission agreed to retain the purpose section, but said the wording can be refined if members submit suggested edits.

• Licensing language narrowed. Commissioners and owners objected to a sentence in Section 17‑01(c) that would have expressly authorized licensing of owners and operators and inspections of recreational vehicles. Commissioners agreed to remove that first sentence and instead keep language that defines owners’ duties and responsibilities and requires parks be maintained “clean, sanitary and fit for temporary human habitation.”

• Exemption for South Terrebonne Development Zone. The draft exempts locations inside the South Terrebonne Development Zone from several drainage and related requirements. Staff explained the zone is visible as a layer on the parish GIS map; the commission asked staff to confirm map boundaries and to correct an online map error that had omitted Pointe Au Chien. Several commenters noted the exemption means many properties in the southern reaches would not be affected by the new rules.

• Planning‑commission approval and permitting sequence. The draft originally said RV parks would be “subject to the Houma‑Terrebonne regional planning commission” and included language giving the planning commission authority to revoke approvals. Multiple speakers — including a planning consultant — recommended removing or rewording that clause because much of the parish is unzoned and the planning commission’s role is limited outside zoned areas. Commissioners signaled support for deleting the explicit requirement that applicants return for separate planning‑commission final approval, leaving permitting instead to the parish permit office when zoning review is not required; several commissioners said removing the extra step would speed approvals.

• Service buildings, health and sanitary facilities. Residents asked whether parks would be required to provide public restrooms, laundry and service buildings. Planning staff and others noted that state and parish health requirements (and the parish permitting process) already govern sanitary facilities and that the draft will be revised to make those items conditional — for example, stating service buildings and sanitary stations are required when applicable or “required by the Department of Health.”

• Site plans and engineering. Several property owners urged the commission not to require professionally engineered site plans for every application because of added cost. Planning staff said larger structures and some permits will continue to require stamped plans, but that the draft can be clarified to allow the planning director discretion to require professional plans only when necessary.

• Separation, density and fire safety. Staff and a consultant cited building‑code and fire‑code separation distances (including references to the International Building Code and NFPA standards) and noted a 10‑foot minimum separation between structures is commonly applied for fire safety. The commission asked staff to confirm the correct code citations for RVs and any special provisions for awnings or other nonpermanent appurtenances and to return with clean language.

• Other edits and guidance. Commissioners and members of the public asked that “optional” or “may” language be used where appropriate (for example, guest parking, recreational common areas and amenities) so that small operators are not forced to provide costly facilities. The draft already removed an earlier section on recreational camps (Section 17‑06), and commissioners discussed removing a provision that duplicated mobile‑home‑park rules (separating mobile homes from RVs) because mobile‑home parks are regulated under an existing separate chapter.

Public concerns and staff responses

Residents and small park owners raised affordability and practical concerns, including that rules could make it harder for low‑income residents who rely on RVs for shelter. One resident asked, “What about the person that can’t afford a house?” Planning staff responded that federally or state‑provided temporary housing programs — for example, FEMA or state emergency housing — are already treated differently and that the parish president’s disaster declarations can suspend land‑use restrictions for authorized temporary housing deployments. Staff also reiterated that the planning commission does not have authority over a separate moratorium that the parish council enacted; staff said that moratorium is outside the commission’s control and lasts either 90 days from signing or until the council acts.

Next steps and schedule

Planning staff said they will revise the draft to: (1) change the RV‑park definition to two or more recreational vehicles on one parcel; (2) remove the explicit licensing sentence in Section 17‑01(c) while keeping duties to maintain parks in sanitary condition; (3) clarify the role of the planning commission versus parish permitting, including removing or rewording explicit planning‑commission approval where it is redundant; (4) mark sanitary/service‑building requirements as subject to the Department of Health or “when provided”; (5) check and clean up language on separations, awnings and the 75% coverage limit; and (6) correct the South Terrebonne Development Zone GIS mapping error.

The commission set a follow‑up special meeting for Oct. 8 (the meeting that was referenced for remaining items) to finish edits; staff asked owners to review the revised draft and to bring additional suggestions to that meeting.

A procedural vote to adjourn closed the session. The meeting was organized as an informational working session; no ordinance was adopted during the meeting.

Ending: The planning commission emphasized that the draft will return for further review and that the next special meeting will be used to finalize language before the draft proceeds through the parish’s regular approval processes.