Definition of Zoning Compliance?

[hastalavista]

I do not do appraisals on unpermitted additions because the addition is against local laws.

Ron:

I should have added that this is a business decision, and a valid one.
It works for you, and you (as a consequence) have zero risk of facing what 23Degree's colleague is dealing with now.

I don't have the same level of risk-aversion (which is my business decision), so I won't categorically exclude properties with unpermitted alterations from my potential assignment pool.

:new_smile-l:

 

[CANative]

If there is an existing 1600 square foot residence in a district that allows residence to be up to 2500 square feet and they add a 900 square foot addition then that would be a legal use and zoning compliance would be legal.

The administrative process of obtaining building permits is an issue separate from zoning. The responsible party can be fined or imprisoned. The property cannot be sent to jail.

 

[Ronald Hauser]

Denis - It says that to meet zoning requirements it needs a garage.... So to do this assignment you would need to put in the cost to return the addition back into a garage or have some kind of garage built or have the homeowner get permits for the illegal/unpermitted addition. What type of value do you give to the addition or do you give it no value? I do not see how you or any other appraiser could appraise the property as it stands because it is not legal.

 

[CANative]

Denis - It says that to meet zoning requirements it needs a garage.... So to do this assignment you would need to put in the cost to return the addition back into a garage or have some kind of garage built or have the homeowner get permits for the illegal/unpermitted addition. What type of value do you give to the addition or do you give it no value? I do not see how you or any other appraiser could appraise the property as it stands because it is not legal.

I don't think anyone disagrees with this. I (and I think Denis) were replying to your earlier post that seemed to be general in nature instead of specific to this thread topic.

In other words, simply not having a building permit in and of itself does not necessarily mean the property is "illegal" or does not conform to zoning laws.

 

[Ronald Hauser]

Yes, my decision has cost me because years ago I lost a client because I would not do an unpermitted addition. I do not think bad of you for your business decisions and it sounds that you have thought this through.

Ron:

I should have added that this is a business decision, and a valid one.
It works for you, and you (as a consequence) have zero risk of facing what 23Degree's colleague is dealing with now.

I don't have the same level of risk-aversion (which is my business decision), so I won't categorically exclude properties with unpermitted alterations from my potential assignment pool.

:new_smile-l:

 

[Ronald Hauser]

I can agree with what you are saying but I also believe that if you are giving the illegal 900 sqft value you might be taking on additional risk to do so. What happens when a fire starts due to faulty wiring in that illegal 900 sqft addition or the foundation settles?

If there is an existing 1600 square foot residence in a district that allows residence to be up to 2500 square feet and they add a 900 square foot addition then that would be a legal use and zoning compliance would be legal.

The administrative process of obtaining building permits is an issue separate from zoning. The responsible party can be fined or imprisoned. The property cannot be sent to jail.

 

[CANative]

What's illegal about the extra 900 square feet? Zoning allows 2500 sf in our hypothetical. It's a legal use of the land.

 

[Ronald Hauser]

In my eyes it is not legal if it is unpermitted. The County Mounty could come by and force them to tear out that addition even if it meets zoning requirements. As you mentioned earlier that zoning and legal can be two different things.

What's illegal about the extra 900 square feet? Zoning allows 2500 sf in our hypothetical. It's a legal use of the land.

 

[23Degrees]

The 900 sf feet does not alter the home from an allowable use. In this situation the zoning code included permit requirements and there was the added issue of setback violations which were not measured during the inspection. I think what was advised by council was that defining "zoning compliance" for the purpose of the report to "allowable use" or something similar could have been very helpful.

I'm not saying the following is any good but my thinking was something along the lines of:

Definition of Zoning Compliance - For the purpose of this report zoning compliance is defined as those property types allowed in R1 zoning. Issues related to specific items such as building permits, set backs, zzz, YYY, ZZZ that are components of the zoning code are considered beyond the scope of this report.

I'm not sure if that would fly, flies in the face of Fannie regs, or not be able to be assailed in a situation like this but might be similar to what they were thinking.

I think the garage conversion might not qualify for protection in a situation like this by any language if "legal" was checked but maybe others have ideas.

 

[Mike Kennedy]

In my eyes it is not legal if it is unpermitted. The County Mounty could come by and force them to tear out that addition even if it meets zoning requirements. As you mentioned earlier that zoning and legal can be two different things.

Ron which County?