03/19/2013AP - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

vehicle storage lots. In response to both directives, staff prepared one ordinance that proposed changes to the CL and CG districts as well as the current RV length limit. At the special call meeting of February 5, 2013, the Board rejected the proposed ordinance. The primary reason for the Board's rejection of the February 2013 ordinance related to proposed changes that would have allowed stand alone outdoor vehicle storage lots in the CL and CG districts. Thus, the Board did not separately consider changes to the existing limit on RV length. The Board may wish to re-consider the RV-related proposed amendment in conjunction with any consideration of an amendment to the current height limit for commercial vehicles parked in residential areas. Recently,staff surveyed 10 local governments,including Indian River County,regarding regulations for parking RVs in residential areas. Six of the ten jurisdictions surveyed (60%) had no length limitation and two jurisdictions(20%)had no length limitation for an RV parked in a specified yard. Only two jurisdictions(20%)had outright limits on RV length(Fellsmere and Indian River County). ANALYSIS • Commercial Vehicles The purpose of the county's length and height limits is to accommodate small-scale and close-to- medium-scale commercial trucks and vans while prohibiting larger commercial vehicles. The premise of having the current dimensional limits is that smaller and close-to-medium scale commercial trucks and vans can fit into residential neighborhoods while larger commercial trucks and vans will stand-out and establish an aesthetic nuisance. In staff's opinion, it is appropriate for the county's regulations to include dimensional limits,as well as the county's outright prohibition on parking certain types of commercial vehicles in residential areas regardless of size. In this case, increasing the county's commercial vehicle height limit from 9 feet to 9 '/2 feet would accommodate Mr. Heen's current commercial vehicle. Since a 9 '/2 foot limit is near the survey average(9 feet)and within the range of height limits imposed by the local governments surveyed(7 feet— 12 feet), a 9 '/2 foot standard would not be unreasonable. It is staff's position that increasing the height limit from 9 feet to 9.5 feet would be un-noticeable to most observers and would not create an obvious nuisance. Of course, the same could be said of a minor change to other quantitative thresholds contained in the LDRs,such as a setback requirement or the building height limitation. It is also staff's position that there is a broad spectrum of commercial truck and vans sizes and that there will always be many types of commonly available commercial vehicles that will "just breach" any dimensional threshold established by the county. • Recreational Vehicles Staff's position is that the county's current 32 foot RV length limit is out of date and does not accommodate many popular RVs that have lengths between 32 feet and 3 8 feet. Consequently,staff supports changing county requirements to eliminate the current length limit and replace it with the 400 square foot overall RV size limit(vehicle length multiplied by vehicle width) contained in the �.. LDRs and State definitions for RVs. That change mirrors the RV-related change proposed in the February 2013 ordinance (see attachment #2). FAConmmnity Development\CurDev\BM2013 BCC\ConimandRVatresidence.doc 3 205