Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Storage Containers topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Spencer County adopts ordinance allowing storage containers on agricultural parcels with conditions
Summary
After extended public comment and debate, the Spencer County Fiscal Court approved Ordinance No. 17 to allow limited storage containers on agricultural parcels with size, setback and appearance rules and a board-of-adjustment path for certain permanent uses.
Spencer County Fiscal Court voted Feb. 3, 2025 to adopt Ordinance No. 17, revising county rules for storage and shipping containers to permit them on agricultural properties under defined conditions.
The ordinance permits a graduated number of containers on agricultural parcels (for example, 10–20 acres: two containers; 21–50 acres: four; 51 acres or more: six); requires each container to be a consistent color on all sides with no logos or advertising; and specifies placement behind the primary residence or, where there is no residence, a minimum 150-foot front-yard setback from the right of way. The ordinance also retains a conditional-use option for temporary needs (such as during construction or fire restoration) limited to 120 days with a possible single 60-day extension by the board of adjustment.
The court amended the planning commission’s draft during debate to clarify that AG-2 parcels may seek permanent container use through the board-of-adjustment process rather than being granted blanket permanent rights in the ordinance text. A separate proposal to limit the length of containers on AG-2 parcels to 20 feet was discussed and defeated by voice vote.
Citizen Julie Sweasy urged tighter appearance rules during public comment, saying she supports the proposed regulations and asking that containers not be visible from the road and that ‘‘If we have multiple containers, they need to be a matching color’’ and that identifying stickers be removed. Proponents framed the ordinance as a compromise: it allows agricultural property owners more flexibility while creating aesthetic and setback standards intended to limit roadside visual impacts.
Planning staff explained the ordinance’s permitting and setback rules and noted the county has previously allowed conditional use for post-fire or temporary storage. During debate, several court members said the language represents a middle ground between full prohibition and no regulation. The court approved the ordinance by voice vote with the amendments in place.
Next steps: The ordinance, as amended, will be implemented according to county code; property owners who seek permanent exceptions on AG-2 parcels will need to file an application with the board of adjustment and participate in the public hearing process.
