Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council tables ordinance on shipping containers after divided public reaction
Summary
Council debated a proposed ordinance to regulate shipping containers and portable storage units; after extensive public comment for and against permanent backyard placement, the council asked staff to redraft restrictions and unanimously tabled the item.
The Paris City Council reopened a public hearing Oct. 28 on a proposed ordinance to define and regulate shipping containers and portable storage units as accessory structures. Staff told the council the change fills a gap in the current code and would require screening, setbacks and an improved surface if containers are allowed in residential districts.
Staff said Planning & Zoning had recommended approval in a split decision. The proposed rules would allow one container in a residential backyard if it is not visible from the street and placed on an "improved surface"; commercial properties would be allowed to use containers behind a building with conditions for visibility and safety.
Public comment was sharply divided. Some residents and council members objected to permanent backyard containers as unsightly and hard to enforce; one council member said, "I don't think metal storage, shipping containers should be in someone's backyard on a permanent basis." Others, including a resident who said her backyard is large, said they would like the option to use a container and would keep it painted and maintained.
Dr. O'Brien urged the council to consider secondary uses and to add precise definitions (for example, distinguishing intermodal containers from portable moving pods) and to avoid unintentionally banning tiny-home conversions or storm shelters. "The intent is to make things pretty, but it's also excluding out so many other possibilities," Dr. O'Brien said.
Given the broad disagreement, council members directed staff to return with clearer language — for example, explicitly prohibiting permanent backyard placement if that is council intent, while keeping temporary moving and construction permits — and to preserve flexibility for legitimate alternative uses that meet building codes. The council voted unanimously to table the ordinance and keep the public hearing open for additional comment and revised language.
Next steps: staff will revise the ordinance to reflect council direction (options discussed included prohibiting permanent backyard placement, limiting residential use to temporary permits, and restricting commercial visibility), and return the item for further review and possible Planning & Zoning reconsideration.
