Clay County planning panel recommends allowing shipping containers on 3-acre lots with screening, height and inspection rules

The Clay County Planning and Zoning Commission on July 25 recommended that the County Commission adopt revisions to the Clay County Land Development Code to permit intermodal shipping containers on lots of at least 3 acres, subject to specific setbacks, screening and maintenance rules.

The recommendation would change a code adopted in 2020 that previously prohibited containers on lots smaller than 10 acres. The commission’s motion, which passed on a roll-call vote, endorses the September draft staff proposal as revised at the meeting, and adds an exemption for farm-use containers on properties of 40 acres or more so long as they meet setbacks. The recommendation now goes to the Clay County Commission for a final decision.

Planning staff summarized two earlier proposals and the revisions under consideration. The July draft would have allowed containers on any lot size with a sliding scale of how many containers are permitted; the September draft sets a minimum lot size of 3 acres, requires containers not be located in front of the principal building line, and adds a 10‑foot maximum height. Staff said the code will also require a building permit and on‑site verification that setback and screening requirements are met. “The initial review would be, do they meet the setback requirements? Are they placing it on a flat hard surface, which is what the criteria says,” planning staff member Kip said at the meeting.

The version the commission forwarded sets a minimum screening requirement of 75% on each visible side facing the street and adjacent properties, requires paint or finish “to minimize visual impact” with the color subject to Planning and Zoning approval, and includes a five‑year inspection requirement at the property owner’s expense. Staff told commissioners the current permit fee would be $90 and the inspection fee also $90 under the county fee schedule; staff said those fees are reviewed annually.

Commissioners and members of the public debated alternatives and enforcement. Commissioners cited aesthetics, homeowner association covenants and the risk of neighbors installing containers only to later discover CCR restrictions. Commissioner comments and BZA (Board of Zoning Appeals) testimony emphasized case-by-case considerations; staff said the county can require a conditional use permit or a permit-review process to notify neighbors for lots under the 3‑acre threshold but noted that a conditional use permit includes additional public notice and expense. Staff gave an approximate figure for a conditional use process at about $600 to cover application, newspaper notice and mailings, subject to the county’s fee schedule.

Members of the public who spoke at the hearing urged clarity and fairness in the rules. Resident Chad Spicer said the 3‑acre minimum would remove many potential problems in smaller subdivisions: “I do support it. You know, I think the 3 to the starting out at the 3 acres would eliminate a lot of problems.” Another resident, Burrows Spicer, questioned the difference between metal accessory buildings and containers and told the commission: “The only difference is the name…That’s discrimination against a shipping container.” Planning staff responded that existing accessory structures are permitted under different code provisions and that the proposed changes are intended to set consistent county standards for intermodal containers.

Staff demonstrated an interactive parcel map showing potential buildable locations under the setback rules. In the areas the presenter displayed, staff reported four parcels under an acre that could accommodate a container location, 63 parcels between 1 and 3 acres, and 96 parcels greater than 3 acres that had at least one place where a container could meet setbacks. Commissioners asked staff to include a permit checklist to prompt applicants to review HOA/CCR restrictions before investing in a container and to give neighborhoods time to amend covenants where desired; staff said the online permit process could require applicants to acknowledge they have checked covenants.

The commission also discussed agricultural exceptions. Staff and commissioners agreed to add an exemption for containers used solely as farm buildings on parcels of 40 acres or more, provided the container meets setback requirements; otherwise farm‑use containers must meet the same screening, painting and permit provisions.

The commission’s recommendation was made by motion to adopt the September draft as revised by the chairman (including staff clarifications on permits, screening and paint) and to add the 40‑acre farm exemption. The motion passed unanimously by roll call.

The commission’s action is a recommendation; the Clay County Commission will consider the ordinance change next. Planning staff asked interested parties to check the Planning and Zoning office for the final schedule and for application instructions.