ADRIAN — Following a public backlash, the Adrian city planning commission dropped the idea of proposing stricter regulations on the storage of campers and similar vehicles at residents’ homes.

The current policy requires recreational vehicles such as motor homes, snowmobiles, boats, and all-terrain vehicles to be stored in a completely enclosed building, with the exception of those that are licensed for operation on a public street, which may also be stored in a resident’s back yard.

The planning commission had been considering adding several new restrictions to the ordinance. Those restrictions would have included:

• Requiring RVs parked outdoors to be no longer than 22 feet.
• Requiring residents who park their RVs outdoors to keep them on an improved surface such as asphalt, a concrete slab, or compacted stone.
• Limiting the size of RV storage spaces to 10% of the area of the back yard, which would have essentially forbidden RV parking for anyone who doesn’t have a large yard.

The planning commission does not have the authority to change city ordinances on its own. Its role is to make recommendations to the city commission.

At the planning commission’s February 6 meeting, chairman Mike Jacobitz said city staff drafted the potential changes in response to some complaints that the city had received from residents. However, he and the other planning commissioners agreed unanimously not to recommend the proposed changes.

Planning commissioner Brad Watson noted that most of the residents who attended the February 5 meeting were against the proposed changes, but he also said he had received some communications from residents who supported them. However, he added, “I took the time to drive around all of Adrian these past few days, and my opinion has changed on the draft ordinance that we have.” He said he did not see the need for any major changes.

Other commissioners agreed with Watson, including Don Taylor, who said it would be worth looking at how many complaints about RVs the city receives.

“We may not have as many complaints as we think,” he said.

All of the residents who spoke at the meeting were against the idea of imposing stricter rules on RVs.

Many said that a well-maintained RV parked at somebody’s home should not be considered a “blight” issue, with one resident commenting that he’s parked his RV at his home for more than 30 years without anybody complaining about it. 

City commissioner Bob Behnke, who is also an RV owner and who distributed information about the proposed changes to many people who had RVs in their yards, said that his camper sits on an asphalt pad and even has landscaping around it, and has been there for 10 years with nobody complaining, but is technically in violation of the ordinance because it isn’t in his back yard.

One resident said that her family’s camper is one of the only luxuries they can afford, and that if she had to rent a storage unit for it, her children would lose that opportunity for recreation.

In addition to the cost of renting a storage unit, resident Carl Yoder said he works on RVs and that they cost more to insure when the owner is not able to keep them at home.

Many residents said that RVs should not be a target for enforcement when there are much bigger problems in the city. One woman commented that one of her neighbors has a toilet sitting in their yard and another has three cars up on jacks.

Watson agreed with those who said the city has bigger problems to deal with.

“There are much bigger things that need to be taken care of,” he said. “I completely agree.”

The planning commissioners who were present at the meeting voted unanimously not to forward any ordinance changes to the city commission for approval.