At the Farmington Town Board's August 25, 2026 public hearing, a local shed business owner described two neighboring properties. One had a 220-square-foot shed. The one next door had applied for a 280-square-foot shed and been denied a permit. The town's Code Enforcement Officer, Mr. Lloyd, explained that both lots sat inside an incentive zoning district. In those districts the Town Board sets its own criteria for each lot size, and at Hathaway's Corners the maximum is essentially 200 square feet for sheds.
For a Farmington buyer with a future garage, workshop, or pole barn in mind, that exchange matters more than the headline change. The town has just finished a six-month process to rewrite its accessory-structure rules, and the new limits are more generous in many districts. In the subdivisions built under incentive zoning, though, the number that decides what fits in the backyard comes from the subdivision's own approval, and the code officer said the rewrite would not change incentive zoning.
Why the town stopped issuing permits for six months
In April 2026, the Town Board held a public hearing on a local law placing a six-month moratorium on accessory structures as defined in Chapter 165 of the town code. Citizen Portal reported that the board adopted it as Local Law 02/2026 on April 14, halting most accessory-structure permits while the code was revised.
According to the April 14 minutes, Mr. Lloyd told the board that "there are numerous points in the town code around accessory structures that are unclear." He said the Zoning Board of Appeals and the Planning Board had no criteria to check applications against. Councilman Bowerman said the updates would, for instance, distinguish among the terms pole barn, private garage, and shed.
At the same hearing, a resident with a garage planned told the board that a six-month freeze would push his permit into October, too late in the year to start construction. A home bought this past spring with a garage plan attached was bought into a building season the town had paused.
The baseline the old code set
Some projects could still go ahead during the moratorium. Mr. Lloyd listed the exceptions as the standards already written into the code. Those standards are also the version of §165-58 that still appeared on the town's code page at eCode360 in late October.
| Structure | Old rule in the listed residential and business districts |
|---|---|
| Shed or other non-garage accessory structure | Up to 300 square feet and 15 feet above grade; no vehicle storage; exterior to match the house or use a neutral finish |
| Private garage or carport | Up to 800 square feet on lots smaller than one acre; one per lot |
| Placement | Rear yard of a lot with a principal structure; five-foot minimum rear-yard setback |
| Height, general | 15 feet to the roof peak |
| PD and IZ districts | Setback and height set by the rezoning resolution |
Even under the old code, planned development and incentive zoning districts took their setbacks and heights from the resolution that created them, not from the townwide schedule.
What the rewrite changes
The replacement is Local Law No. 4 of 2026. It amends the town's zoning definitions, the accessory-structure section, and the Schedule 1 lot area, bulk and coverage table, and it deletes a local attachment on stormwater management practices. A committee of Town Board, Planning Board, and Agricultural Advisory Committee members drafted it, and Supervisor Peter Ingalsbe said the revisions were meant to make some of the town's restrictions more reasonable, according to FingerLakes1.com.
When Ontario County planning staff reviewed the proposal in August, Citizen Portal reported that a staff member summarized it this way: "The proposed amendment ... increases the maximum permitted size of residential accessory structures ... from 300 square feet to 500 square feet while establishing significantly larger allowances, 1,200 to 2,000 square feet for business in industrial districts." In the same summary, the proposal moves the dimensional standards into a new table and ties both the number and the size of accessory structures to lot area. At the August hearing, Mr. Lloyd said that under the proposal "there is a number based on the zoning and/or the lot size."
The draft changed after that review. In September, the Planning Director, Mr. Brand, told the Planning Board that the Town Board had found the draft "would not work in all RR-80 zoning districts" and had prepared an amended version. Councilman Bowerman said several changes followed review with Ontario County Planning and the town's attorney. Officials gave the moratorium's end as October 16 at one meeting and October 26 at another. Both dates fall after the October 13 adoption vote described below.
Citizen Portal reported that the board voted to adopt the final draft on October 13, 2026. The town's October 13 resolution directs the Town Clerk to file a certified copy with the New York Department of State and then notify town staff of the filing date and effective date. That makes the 500-square-foot figure the county's summary of the August proposal, not a confirmed number for any given lot. The district-by-district table in the adopted law is the document that controls.
The layer the new law leaves in place
Here the general code and the actual backyard can differ. Asked at the August hearing about the 500-square-foot figure, Mr. Lloyd said it "would not change the incentive zoning." The town code officer named three incentive-zoned neighborhoods with their own criteria for different lot sizes:
- Hathaway's Corners, where he described sheds as capped at essentially 200 square feet
- Hickory Rise
- Auburn Meadows
Lot size still matters inside those neighborhoods. The shed business owner noted that some larger lots at Hathaway's Corners carry bigger sheds, and the 280-square-foot denial was on a smaller lot. Two homes on the same street can have different shed limits, and the photo of a large shed next door shows only what that lot was allowed.
Farmbrook is a useful contrast. The shed business owner pointed out that some fairly small Farmbrook lots had been allowed 300-square-foot buildings. Mr. Lloyd explained that the area is zoned R-110 and is not incentive zoning, so the general rules apply. Farmbrook's lots are small and Hathaway's Corners' lots are small, yet they answer to different rulebooks.
Mr. Brand added a third layer at the same hearing. Where a property has an approved site plan, "whatever is shown on the site plan is what is allowed." The same layering applies to what is coming. Farmington Meadows, on the east side of State Route 332 south of County Road 41, is an incentive zoning project. Its preliminary approvals from May 20, 2026 cover 37 single-family homes, 230 rental townhomes, five commercial pad sites, 150 senior units, and a storage facility. Accessory rules for those future homes will come from that project's approvals, not only from §165-58.
The same pattern appears on vacant land. When the Planning Board reviewed a new single-family home on Cline Road this fall, its minutes noted that the house's placement could mean future accessory structures would need area variances. Where the house sits on a lot can limit the garage before any size cap applies.
What the paperwork trail looks like at purchase
For a buyer whose plans depend on a structure that doesn't exist yet, the questions follow from the layers above:
- Is the property in an incentive zoning or planned development district, and if so, what accessory limits does that approval set for this lot size?
- Is there an approved site plan for the property, and what does it show?
- What does the adopted Local Law No. 4 table allow for the lot's zoning district and lot area, and has the law been filed and taken effect?
- Does the house's position leave rear-yard room for the structure under the setbacks, or would a variance be needed?
The Farmington code office has offered help with this. At the August hearing, Mr. Lloyd asked the shed business owner to email him for guidance on the guidelines. This post is general information drawn from public town records, not legal advice. Anyone weighing a purchase on the strength of a future building should confirm the rules for their specific parcel with the Town of Farmington and, where needed, a real estate attorney.
A few questions that come up
Do agricultural buildings follow the same limits? The law includes a provision for accessory structures used exclusively for agricultural operations. At the August hearing, Mr. Brand said a farm that does not yet exist would not count as established. He said documentation supporting an agricultural exemption would help show an operation is established or being established, and that a structure approved as agricultural is limited to agricultural use, not habitation or commercial storage.
What if a building needs more height than the code allows? Supervisor Ingalsbe said at the August hearing that some buildings may need to exceed the height limits for a particular purpose. In those cases the building department reviews the request, and if the owner can justify it, the Zoning Board of Appeals considers whether to grant the additional height.
Where can the law itself be read? At its September 22 meeting, the Town Board said the final draft would be posted on the town's website, farmingtonny.gov. The town's resolutions also describe a copy filed with the Town Clerk's office. The town's online code at eCode360 showed the earlier §165-58 text through late October, so the Town Clerk's office is the place to confirm the current version.
When a garage, workshop, or pole barn is part of why a property makes sense, the subdivision approvals and site plan should be reviewed before an offer is written, not after closing. Deanna & Steve Nissen help Farmington buyers find those documents early and work through what they mean for the plans behind a purchase. Get in Touch.
