Indian River County discusses food-truck rules, directs staff to return with revised ordinance

Indian River County commissioners on Jan. 13 discussed a proposed ordinance to regulate mobile food-dispensing vehicles in the county's unincorporated areas, directing staff to revise the draft and re-advertise a future public hearing rather than taking legislative action immediately.

Staff told the board the draft ordinance would require display of state DBPR licenses and fire and health inspection reports, require written property-owner consent when vendors operate on private property, and set an effective date of 90 days after final adoption to give operators time to comply. Staff recommended adoption of land-development amendments to codify food-truck operations while preserving existing allowances such as the Gifford Farmers Market and mobile lunch trucks.

Commissioners debated core points raised by staff and members of the public. One commissioner who identified himself in the discussion as a proponent of flexible rules said the county's six-month suspension of enforcement had not produced widespread problems and argued for carved exceptions where trucks are part of contracted events. He said food trucks are often card-based, professionally run businesses and urged the board to avoid treating them as a nuisance.

Ryan Sweeney, assistant planning and development services director, told the board staff can remove hours-of-operation limits from the draft and rely on existing noise ordinances, but recommended limiting tents and tables to small configurations (for example, a 10-by-10 tent and a picnic table) to avoid obstructing sidewalks or accessible paths. On zoning, Sweeney recommended allowing mobile vendors on CG (commercial general) properties only on parcels of at least three acres to avoid proliferation on small commercial lots.

The board opened a public hearing and heard a brief comment from Dane Jones, owner of Good Old Drive in Sebastian, who said his concerns had been addressed and thanked the commissioners.

Rather than approve ordinance language, commissioners asked staff and the county attorney to revisit the draft based on the discussion and re-advertise a public hearing. "We'll re-advertise and bring this back to us so we can solidify and actually create legislation," the chair said. The direction was procedural; no vote on an ordinance occurred during the Jan. 13 meeting.

Next steps: staff said it will revise the draft ordinance to reflect the commissioners' feedback on hours, tents and CG zoning and return for a re-advertised public hearing and formal legislative action.