The Shelby County Board considered a text amendment that would have prohibited shipping containers in areas zoned residential and rural residential but did not adopt a countywide ban. Public commenters and several board members argued against a blanket prohibition, while others said legal review was needed before acting.

The amendment would have barred new placement of shipping containers in residential and rural-residential zoning districts. The proposal drew public comments opposing a ban and drew several board members’ objections at the August 14 meeting.

“Banning shipping containers does not create development. It restricts flexibility,” said Peter Otis, who identified himself at the meeting as president of the court and spoke during public comment. John Hennington, who described himself as a shipping-container owner, told the board the units “are an affordable solution” and that some people move containers when they relocate.

Board members questioned enforceability, the effect on property rights and whether the county should regulate uses that homeowners already manage themselves. One board member said the item began from an anonymous health-department complaint and noted the health agency reported no public-health concern in that instance. Other members warned a ban could set a precedent leading to more intrusive rules on portable sheds or yard decorations and said the county lacks permitting mechanisms that would make enforcement straightforward.

Several commissioners urged a legal review before considering restrictions that might affect portable buildings broadly. Members also noted the amendment would apply only to parts of the county mapped as residential or rural residential and would not affect municipalities with their own zoning.

In a voice vote the chair called for, several members opposed the amendment and the board moved on without adopting a countywide prohibition.

The issue raised follow-up questions the board said should be handled through legal review or more targeted ordinances rather than a blanket restriction.