Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Batesburg-Leesville council tables first reading of tiny-home definition after container-housing debate
Summary
At its July meeting the Batesburg-Leesville Town Council voted to table a first-reading ordinance that would add a tiny-home definition to the zoning code after members raised concerns about 40-foot shipping containers and aesthetics; a joint work session with planning was scheduled.
The Batesburg-Leesville Town Council on the first reading decided to table a proposed ordinance that would add a “tiny home” definition to the town’s zoning code, after councilors raised concerns that the language could allow 40-foot shipping containers to be converted into residences.
Planning staff member Becky told the council that the building code imposes size requirements. “To my knowledge, there are minimum sizes that the state requires or that I'm sorry, that the building code requires for a tiny home,” Becky said. Council members nevertheless worried the proposed definition left appearance and siting issues open.
One council member pressed the point directly: “I'm concerned that people will start bringing in 40 foot containers and they're not that attractive,” the councilor said, urging clearer standards on exterior treatments. Planning staff and other council members said the ordinance text could be revised to address aesthetics or sent back to the planning commission for more work.
Councilmember (the mover) said they preferred more work up front and formally moved to table the ordinance until a work session could be held so the council and planning commission could craft recommended changes. “I make a motion that we table this until council can hold a work session to discuss the recommendations and the changes, in detail,” the council member said. The motion to table was seconded and passed by roll-call vote.
The council directed staff to schedule a joint work session with the planning commission so members can consider specific additions—such as size caps, required building-code compliance, and possible exterior treatments—before the ordinance returns for another reading. No final changes to the zoning code were adopted at the meeting.
The council did not set a final date for the work session in open session; council members discussed holding the joint session and confirmed interest in having planning staff present. The tabling action means the ordinance will not proceed to a second reading until after the joint work session and any edits recommended by the planning commission and council are considered.
