The Richfield City Council on Aug. 26 approved the first reading of an ordinance to regulate temporary outdoor portable storage containers on private property, advancing the measure with amendments that limit the number and duration of containers and ban habitation. The ordinance as amended allows a maximum of two containers per property (counted by total storage area), restricts placement to paved driveways, sets a maximum stay of 60 consecutive days (90 days total per calendar year), and adds explicit language that containers may not be used for human or animal habitation. Council members and staff said the changes respond to resident complaints about rusty, long‑term containers becoming permanent storage on lots."The issue that we're seeing in the city... is more about the aesthetic of it. Residents are complaining that it's unsightly," said the Support Services Manager, describing repeated complaints about containers left in backyards and along alleys for years. Council Member Burke said she supported adding a prohibition on habitation and recommended counting the total storage area rather than the number of units; Burke also pressed for more flexibility for residents undergoing lengthy renovations."Thirty days doesn't seem long enough," Burke said, arguing that some remodeling projects last longer than a month. After discussion the council agreed to allow staff to authorize extended periods in demonstrable cases and to set the default allowance at 60 consecutive days with a 90‑day annual cap. Council Member Hayford O'Leary suggested keeping a 30‑day by‑right period and allowing staff to authorize up to six months for demonstrated needs; council ultimately reached consensus on the 60‑day default and staff flexibility. The council also asked staff to clarify conflicting placement language in the draft regarding "hard surface" parking versus areas "reserved for parking," and to review whether a limited administrative waiver should be available for narrow driveways or unusual lot configurations. The ordinance will return for a second reading on Sept. 9 with revised language reflecting the council's direction. At the meeting the council voted on the amendments by voice vote and then approved the first reading as amended; the record does not include a roll‑call tally. The staff packet described the changes as addressing the length of time containers can remain on site and adding related requirements, noting complaints that some containers are "in poor condition" and have been left for "a year or two." The council directed staff to craft clarifying language that: (1) counts total storage footprint rather than only number of units; (2) sets a limit of two containers for most cases; (3) prohibits human or animal habitation of containers; (4) sets a 60 consecutive‑day default with a 90‑day annual cap; and (5) clarifies placement rules and staff waiver authority. The action at this meeting was procedural (first reading) and requires a second reading for final adoption.