Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council postpones decision on shipping-container variance at 1214 West Burton Street
Summary
Kirksville City Council postponed consideration of a variance request to allow a metal shipping container at 1214 West Burton Street after staff and planning commissioners recommended denial and council members said they wanted more information and time to view the site.
The Kirksville City Council voted to postpone action on a variance that would permit a metal shipping container to serve as an accessory building at 1214 West Burton Street.
City planner Sarah Knight told the council that staff could not recommend the variance and that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended denial. Knight said the municipal code prohibits using metal seagoing containers as accessory buildings in residential zones, citing concerns including corrosion, environmental factors and potential effects on nearby home values.
Andrew Schultz, who identified himself as the applicant and a resident at 7 Sunset Drive, said the container is "a one-trip container" in good condition and that it would be placed behind the house on concrete piers and used for storing construction materials and safety signs. Schultz said the container would be set and not moved, that it was not likely to affect property values in that location and that there are already containers visible from nearby roads and public properties.
Council members pressed Schultz on visibility, the number of nearby residences, and alternatives. One council member noted that commercial properties in town can host containers and questioned why the applicant did not use available commercial space. Several council members said they respected the Planning and Zoning recommendation and city staff guidance and wanted to visit the site in person before making a decision.
After discussion, a council member moved to postpone consideration until the next city council meeting; the motion was seconded and carried. The council did not vote on the variance itself and gave no additional conditions other than requesting more information and site review prior to reconsideration.
The postponement preserves the status quo under the city's zoning code; council members who spoke said the topic raised questions about precedent and long-term impacts on residential areas. The item is expected to return for reconsideration at the council's next regular meeting.
