Agenda - Planning Commission - 05/06/1997

Home

Z.B. April 10, 1997 Page 7 I I I I I I I I I I ! I I I I I I I Mobile Home --~Does extended width of park's trailers make them mobile homes? Sunshine Key Associates Limited Partnership v. Monroe County, 684 So.2d 876 (Florida) 1996 Sunshine Key Associates Limited Partnership owned and operated a recreational-vehicle park in Monroe County, Fla. Most of the park's trailers were plug-in models that got their water supply through garden hoses. Some trailers had sheds land porches attached to them. In 1986, Monroe County passed regulations defining recreational vehicles and mobile homes. According to the county's standards, a recreational vehicle did not exceed 8 feet in width or 35 feet in length, was highway ready, and had no permanent structures or rooms attached to it. By contrast, a mobile home was defined as a structure that exceeded the 8- feet-width parameter, and was equipped with dwelling necessities, including plumbing, electrical and heating systems. The county also included in this mobile-home definition "park models," which were "expandable recreational vehicles" designed for permanent residence. In 1992, the county's director of planning issued a memorandum saying the county had not followed these regulations, and that certain "park models" would no longer be permitted in land-use districts designated for recreational vehicles. Before the memo was issued, the county had allowed recreational vehicles and park models, regardless of their size, to stay at Sunshine Key's park. Earlier that year Sunshine Key had also requested permits to provide tie-downs, concrete slabs and electrical hookups for numerous park models on its property. The county cited Sunshine Key, which appealed to the County Planning Commission, arguing the county's definition of park models as mobile homes was arbitrary. The Commission denied Sunshine Key's appeal, which the Board of County Commissioners later affirmed. Sunshine Key sued the county. Both Sunshine Key and Monroe County agreed wider, road-ready recreational vehicles were now available. However, they disagreed about whether the park's models were road-ready or permanently attached to their sites. Sunshine Key said the attached sheds and porches inhibited the trailers' road readiness, but said individual trailer owners, not Sunshine Key, were responsible for those improvements. It also presented testimony that trailers were transportable and used as only temporary living quarters. The court granted the county judgment, saying the models met all the re- quirements for recreational vehicles except for their width. Sunshine Key appealed. DECISION: Reversed and returned to the lower court. The main issue, as the trial court correctly identified but wrongly interpreted, was whether the width distinction between recreational vehicles and mobile homes was arbitrary or without reason. Since the recreational-vehicle industry was making wider models with road capabilities, Monroe County's 8-foot-width