Planning commission continues RV campground review; commission and owner discuss 90‑day rule and possible ordinance changes

The Willard City Planning Commission continued review March 6 of a conditional use permit issued Feb. 7, 2020 to Marvin Neff for an RV campground at 769 North Main.

Neff and representatives argued the campground has operated in compliance with its conditional use permit since 2020 and asked the commission to accept that compliance, to consider amending the existing permit to reflect current operations, or to pursue ordinance changes to accommodate the site’s current model. "We have been in strict compliance with our conditional use permit," a representative for the campground told the commission.

Background and concerns: Commissioners and staff recalled that the campground site had produced public‑safety and nuisance problems under earlier ownership and that the current owner tightened permit conditions when he acquired the property. After concerns surfaced about the potential for long‑term residents, the city adopted a stricter ordinance that includes a 90‑day limit per site in a 365‑day period. At the hearing, the owner and multiple commissioners said the current operation has not produced the problems that occurred previously and that operations today appear to be well managed.

Key points of discussion: - Compliance and enforcement: The owner said he has addressed past concerns and provided documentation and police input suggesting problems have declined since 2020. Several commissioners asked staff and the police whether the property is being adequately policed and whether the current conditions give the city sufficient enforcement tools if problems reappear. - 90‑day limit: Commissioners debated whether the city’s 90‑day maximum stay per site is the appropriate limit, noting that some users treat the campground as a semi‑permanent home base but move regularly. The owner suggested the conditions the city could place on longer stays (background checks, police notification, or other safeguards) may be more effective than a strict time cap. - Protection against future changes in ownership: Commissioners said they want to avoid a return to the prior problematic operating model if the campground changes hands. Several commissioners proposed amending the permit or the ordinance so the current conditions — including maintenance, background checks and eviction authority — are explicit and enforceable if ownership changes. - Legal and procedural questions: City staff and legal counsel said they would need to review whether the existing conditional use permit or the newer ordinance controls and whether changes would apply prospectively or to existing permits. One official recused themself from a portion of the discussion because of a prior involvement with the property.

Outcome and next steps: Commissioners did not take a final action at the March 6 meeting. They asked staff to provide a more detailed legal analysis and recommended a work session with council members and staff to determine whether to amend the CUP for this property, update the campground ordinance citywide, or both. Several commissioners asked the owner to propose, in writing, the permit conditions he believes should remain in place so staff and council can evaluate whether to codify those elements.

Ending: Commissioners said they appreciate the current owner’s efforts to maintain the site and emphasized the city’s interest in written, enforceable criteria to prevent future declines in operation should the property change ownership.