Volusia County Council narrows shipping-container rules, directs staff to redraft ordinance

The Volusia County Council voted March 4 to send the proposed shipping-container ordinance back to staff for redrafting after an extensive hearing that focused on permitting, taxation, floodplain rules and how the county should treat containers on agricultural and rural residential land.

Planning Director Carol McFarland presented the ordinance (listed as Ordinance 2024‑16) and described its two main parts: an exemption that would allow shipping containers on agricultural parcels without a permit (subject to floodplain rules), and a permitting and screening regime for commercial, industrial and other nonresidential zoning. McFarland told the council the draft set caps linked to parcel size and included standards for foundations, flood hazard management and landscaping.

Council members raised practical and policy concerns about permit fees, whether containers become taxable improvements, and how the county should treat temporary units. Interim building official Nick Ventura explained that under the Florida Building Code a temporary structure is limited to 180 days; if a container is declared a temporary structure it would not be permitted indefinitely without bringing it into compliance or pursuing code compliance after 180 days.

Several council members said they wanted the ordinance to be less burdensome for residents on small rural parcels while still addressing concerns about commercial misuse along corridors. Councilman Danny Robbins made a motion — seconded by Troy Kent — directing staff to redraft the ordinance with the council’s directions. The council asked staff to:

- Keep the agricultural permit exemption and explicitly mirror it where feasible for rural residential (RR) and RA zonings down to a 1‑acre minimum; set a maximum of two containers for lots between 1 and 2.5 acres and retain the larger cap formula for much larger parcels. - Use the word “stable” (not “solid”) to describe acceptable anchoring/foundation and avoid provisions that would require poking holes in containers as a floodplain fix. - Exempt industrial uses from the new permitting/fee regime and avoid adding routine fees for businesses and active job sites. - Prohibit use of containers as habitable spaces without full building permits; bar containers as signs; require screening on commercial/industrial sites but avoid onerous standards on working industrial sites. - Explore removing separate permits/fees for certain accessory containers and rely on code compliance and setbacks instead of a stand‑alone permit. - Return the draft directly to the council (not revert to PLDRC) after staff redlines and consultation, and consult the Property Appraiser about tax assessment implications.

McFarland and deputy county attorneys said staff would take the council’s direction and return a revised ordinance. The motion to send the draft back for revision passed unanimously, 7–0. Chair and council members emphasized they wanted a simplified code for residents while keeping protections for public safety and pedestrian/vehicular access.

Ending: The council approved staff direction to rewrite the ordinance and asked that the revised draft come back to the council (not PLDRC) for final action. Staff also was asked to consult the Property Appraiser about tax‑assessment consequences before the ordinance is returned.