SAHUARITA, Ariz. (KGUN) — A Sahuarita resident is raising concerns over a Pima County rule that prohibits shipping containers on private property, after being told he must remove one that has sat on his land for more than 15 years.
John David Thompson, who lives on 10 acres in Sahuarita, said the trouble began earlier this year after he complained about a neighbor allowing someone to live in a trailer near his property line.
According to Thompson, that situation led to a complaint being filed against him, targeting the storage container he has used for more than a decade.
“The neighbor had a guy living on our back property line and was causing some havoc,” Thompson said. “When the county told him he couldn’t stay there, he filed a complaint about me having a storage container.”
County rules prohibit shipping containers in residential areas, though Thompson points to dozens of similar structures scattered throughout his neighborhood.
What makes the enforcement unusual, he argues, is that Pima County only takes action when a written complaint is filed.
“I feel like I’m being singled out because someone has a vindictive bone in their body against me,” Thompson said. “He’s gonna try to get me to get rid of my storage container.”
County officials acknowledge that enforcement is complaint-driven, but say that the system is in place to ensure fairness and manage limited resources.
Tom Drzazgowski, deputy director of Pima County Development Services, said the county must respond consistently to written complaints.
“It prevents us from being accused of not applying things uniformly,” Drzazgowski explained. “So when we receive a written complaint, we really have the opportunity to help resolve a complaint that adversely affects a neighboring property owner.”
He says he received the complaint against Thompson in April, which also cited open storage of junk and inoperable vehicles and unlawful storage and disposal of solid waste.
He says the cargo container investigation is warranted due to its location on the property.
“The shipping container is on the northern part of the property, in close proximity to the road,” Drzazgowski said. “We’re having property owners in the area drive by, see this on a regular basis and it’s probably generating concerns for them.”
As a potential solution, the county suggested Thompson move the container to a less visible, more central location on his land.
But before he can do that, Thompson must apply for a variance hearing that costs $891.
The Planning and Zoning Commission oversees the variance process and decides whether the container can be moved to another spot or needs to be removed completely. Drzazgowski says variance hearings have about a 60% approval rate and the commission considers the full range of issues in its decision, including input from neighbors and the level of the container’s visibility.
On top of the variance fee, Thompson estimates it will take another $600 to move the container and install fencing.
He worries about affording the changes on his fixed income, adding that taxes are due in October.
“It’ll probably cost me a thousand to move it and put up a fence and another thousand for the hearing,” Thompson said. “But if they want me to move it, I’m willing. If that will fix the problem, I’ll move it to where they can’t see in the middle of the property.”
Thompson says he’d like to see the $891 fee waived and hopes for a rule change so that others in his position can avoid a similar situation.
District 3 Supervisor Jen Allen provided a statement regarding the matter:
“Our office has been working with Mr. Thompson to help connect him with Development Services and to find solutions to his storage container. We see a lot of requests for variances in District 3 and try to make the process clear, transparent, and fair for everyone. It is my understanding that Mr. Thompson is finding a new location for his storage container on his property and has been working closely with County staff to secure a variance and resolve the situation.”
They say they’re working to standardize the rules on variances, such as providing a list of items that need to be accomplished in order to secure a variance. They say these efforts began a few months before Thompson’s situation and that it is an ongoing process.
For now, Thompson has been granted an extension until October 15 while he and the county work to determine a solution.
----
STAY IN TOUCH WITH US ANYTIME, ANYWHERE
