Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rv Parking topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bluff planners seek public input on RV, mobile‑home and RV‑park rules; commenters raise generator and definition concerns
Summary
Planning commissioners presented a revised recreational vehicle and mobile‑home ordinance to clarify where RVs and RV parks can be sited and to set standards; public commenters asked for clearer long‑term/short‑term definitions, limits on generator use, and clarification for nonprofit volunteer/staff RV spots.
Planning and zoning commissioners brought forward a comprehensive recreational vehicle, mobile‑home and RV‑park draft ordinance intended to define allowable locations, lot sizes, setbacks and design standards for both individual RV use and for organized RV parks.
Commissioner Marshall (presenting) said the drafts aim to balance public health and safety with the potential for RVs to serve as economic or housing resources for Bluff. Staff prepared charts showing allowed RV locations and quantities by zone and described conditional‑use and basic standards for park design. The ordinance is returning for more public input and is still under legal review.
Public commenters raised several concerns. Josh Ewing urged that 24‑hour street parking allowances be clarified to say 'unoccupied' parking so the ordinance does not invite long‑term camping on residential streets; he also recommended clearer definitions distinguishing 'long term' from 'short term' (noting inconsistency where one section used a 30‑day marker and another mentioned a six‑month occupancy allowance for driveways). He suggested limiting generator use to electrical outages to reduce noise impacts. Online commenter Nicole Croft, director of operations at Verziers Partnership, requested clarity on whether volunteer and short‑term staff RV spots at nonprofit properties would qualify as a 'recreational vehicle park' under the draft.
Commissioners and staff encouraged written comments through Nov. 7, 2025, and noted they would follow up with property‑specific inquiries where appropriate. No adoption vote occurred at the hearing.
