BZA denies request to run outdoor retail 'Kearney Shed' operation on Clearview Acres lot

The Clay County Board of Zoning Adjustment voted to deny a variance requested by Kearney Shed LLC to operate an outdoor retail and storage operation for accessory buildings from a roughly 9.75-acre agricultural parcel on Nation Road.

Applicants Anna and Jason Jacobs told the board they sell prefabricated accessory buildings (sheds) from the property; they said sheds are built by a manufacturer off-site and transported to customers, and that they intended to keep a small in‑stock inventory for customer viewings. The applicants also submitted a letter and customer-supply figures indicating many orders are handled remotely and that they wanted to retain 6–12 units on site for display.

Staff advised the applicants that the request implicated three parts of the home-occupation code (outdoor activities, exterior appearance, and retail sales), which the land development code typically prohibits for home occupations. Staff said the case began as a code-enforcement matter after a banner and a large amount of on-site inventory drew attention; the property is located near existing residential subdivisions and adjacent to areas inside the City of Kearney’s managed growth area. The county mailed 120 notices for the case. Support letters from immediate agricultural neighbors were submitted; opponents included a neighborhood representative who said the lot is effectively surrounded by city-designated growth and expressed concern about establishing a commercial retail site adjacent to residential development.

Commissioners debated whether the activity remained a small-scale, low-impact home occupation or had the scale and visibility of commercial retail. Commissioner Carpenter and others said the requested combination of outdoor retail, visible inventory and sizable on-site storage was a “significant departure” from typical home-occupation limits and more appropriately belongs in a property zoned for commercial or industrial uses.

Commissioner Lawson initially proposed approving the variance with conditions (a two-year term, a limit on the number of buildings kept on-site and placement behind the house), but that motion failed for lack of a second. Another commissioner then moved to deny the variance; the motion was seconded, and on roll call the board voted to deny the request (board members recorded their votes as yes to deny). The denial means the existing inventory must be removed or otherwise brought into conformance with county code; staff said the applicants could pursue other options such as relocating to a commercially zoned parcel or applying for different zoning but noted the city’s annexation and land-use policies may limit alternatives nearby.

The board’s denial was based on the record presented and the scale and outdoor retail nature of the operation, not on the applicants’ conduct. Staff confirmed the county will continue to work with applicants on compliance options.