Planning commission recommends code changes on accessory structures, including higher shop height and revised setbacks

The Orland Planning Commission on an unspecified date held a public hearing and recommended the city council approve a package of municipal-code amendments addressing accessory structures (sheds, shops, detached garages and similar buildings).

Staff presented proposed amendments that would increase the allowable height for many accessory storage or shop structures from 15 feet to a 25-foot maximum and would remove an existing R1 restriction that prevented electrical or plumbing service in some accessory buildings. The proposal would also require accessory structures to be constructed and maintained to prevent stormwater runoff onto neighboring properties and would establish a tiered system of setbacks based on structure height.

Under the draft text staff described, small structures that meet all three conditionsare 120 square feet or less in area, 6 feet or less in height, and do not trigger a building permitwould be allowed at a zero-foot side and rear setback so long as they do not create runoff onto adjacent parcels. Structures between 6 and 15 feet high would be subject to a 4-foot setback; structures between 15 and 25 feet would face a one-to-one side/rear setback ratio (for example, a 17-foot structure would require a 6-foot setback). The draft would also align accessory structure setbacks with ADU rules in several respects and preserve separate standards that apply to garages and patio covers.

Planning staff and the building official discussed existing California building-code thresholds and the local building departments preference that the 20-square-foot building-code exemption remain unchanged. Staff explained the local fence standard and related wind-load engineering rationale behind a 6-foot threshold, and that any accessory structure that installs utilities or otherwise triggers building-code requirements would require the applicable permits and inspections.

A member of the public asked whether existing, taller detached garages are grandfathered; staff confirmed preexisting structures remain legal nonconforming conditions but that new or expanded structures must meet the updated standards or seek a variance. Several commissioners raised fire- and emergency-access concerns about zero-foot setbacks; staff said they had consulted the fire chief and noted the fire chief expressed reservations about 0-foot setbacks.

The commission moved to recommend approval of the municipal-code amendment as presented and to include an environmental determination finding of exemption under California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guideline 15061(b)(3). The motion was seconded and carried by a voice vote of commissioners present. The recommendation will go to the city council for its hearings and action.

If adopted by the council, the amendments would change allowable accessory-structure heights, clarify limits on habitable uses (ADUs remain subject to state ADU law), allow limited utility installations in accessory buildings, codify stormwater/runoff responsibilities, and implement the proposed tiered setback system and small-structure exceptions.

Staff noted that changes to the application form could achieve many of the objectives more quickly; the commission asked staff to return with final text and the CEQA finding for the city council's two hearings.