Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rv Code Revision topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commission spends the bulk of meeting revising RV park rules: setbacks, length-of-stay, supervision, fees and waste handling
Summary
Commissioners debated a broad rewrite of Willard's RV park and RV-operational code (chapter 24-92-030), focusing on setbacks (compromise to 50 feet), supervision age in common areas (proposed reduction from 18 to 16), length-of-stay limits (clarifying 90-day vs. 12-month language), and mechanisms to capture costs (extended-stay fees tied to city services). Staff will refine language and return the draft for a public hearing.
The Willard City Planning Commission devoted the largest portion of its July 17 meeting to an extended review of proposed revisions to the recreation vehicle (RV) park code, which the staff presented as amendments to chapter 24-92-030 of the Willard City zoning code.
Key items discussed included: the minimum setback for RVs from property lines (the draft said 100 feet; commissioners argued that was excessive and several preferred 10, 15, 30 or 50 feet; staff agreed to change the draft to 50 feet), the required supervision age in shared facilities (the draft stated "children under the age of 18 shall be supervised at all times when using restrooms, showers, laundry facilities, and other common areas"; at least two commissioners recommended lowering that to 16), and clarifying language about length-of-stay limits. Commissioners identified an ambiguity between a 90-consecutive-day limit and a 12-month cap and directed staff to make the intent consistent in the draft so it closes the loophole that could allow continuous rolling 90-day stays.
Commissioners also discussed how to ensure the city is not subsidizing service costs for long-term RV occupants. They explored an "extended-stay" permit or fee intended to capture administrative and service impacts (police calls, staff time) and considered charging parks a monthly fee tied to estimated water and sewer Equivalent Residential Units (ERUs) or peak demand rather than a per-customer charge. Speaker 10 summarized that option, noting some cities use an extended-stay application fee in the $75'$275 range to offset municipal costs; staff said such fee structures would require a separate fee-resolution process.
Other operational items raised included perimeter fencing, refuse containment, green-space requirements, fire-pit safety/nearby fire suppression, waste-disposal hookups (black- and gray-water management), and whether a mobile-home section should be removed from the RV chapter. Commissioners emphasized the distinction between an RV park (temporary use) and a mobile-home park (permanent); several asked staff to remove mobile-home language from the RV chapter.
Outcomes and next steps: staff will revise the draft to (1) change the setback to 50 feet, (2) consider lowering the supervision age to 16, (3) reconcile the 90-day and 12-month language so the long-term occupancy limit is clear, (4) remove the mobile-home references from the RV chapter, and (5) add/clarify operational items (refuse, fencing, green space, waste disposal). The commission requested a clean copy that consolidates the new language for posting and a subsequent public hearing.
