Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Tiny Homes topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Mount Shasta council approves first reading of ‘Tiny Homes on Wheels’ ordinance
Summary
The Mount Shasta City Council approved the first reading of an ordinance to add a 'Tiny Homes on Wheels' chapter to the municipal code, allowing small permanent housing clusters (up to 400 sq ft) in specified zones; the planning commission previously approved the measure and the vote was unanimous.
The Mount Shasta City Council on a voice vote approved the first reading of an ordinance (CCO-25) to add chapter 18.18, "Tiny Homes on Wheels," to the Mount Shasta Municipal Code.
Speaker 3, who introduced the item, said the ordinance establishes objective design standards for tiny home villages of generally between three and nine units and limits unit size to up to 400 square feet. The zoning categories listed in the report where tiny home villages would be allowed are R-2, R-3, C-1 and C-2. "We have the receipt from the paper," Speaker 3 said when addressing concerns that noticing requirements had not been met.
The planning commission approved the ordinance before it came to council. Speaker 3 emphasized the ordinance treats tiny homes as permanent housing — not short-term rentals — and pointed to the code language that "long term housing only shall not be rented for periods of less than 30 days in duration." Council members asked whether local rules could require longer minimum stays; another member flagged potential legal constraints under California's month-to-month tenancy rules.
Speaker 3 also warned that an opponent could sue and seek a CEQA review of the code, which could stall projects even if the city ultimately prevailed. Despite those cautions, the council voted to read the ordinance by title only; the vote was seconded and carried with all members saying "aye." The item will return for a subsequent reading and any required environmental review or procedural steps.
The ordinance text and planning commission findings are part of the municipal packet; questions about the exact CEQA requirements and next steps were directed to the city attorney during the meeting.
