Legal or Legal Non Conforming

[Joyce Potts]

IMO, it's legal, non-conforming.

It's the better choice of two evils, from a form standpoint.

The current site falls short of a rebuild as current zoning requires 1.5 acres.

If I'm understanding your post correctly. Why go out on a limb?

 

[Wendy]

Joyce - I agree with you. That's why I mark it.

 

[xm39hnu]

When I get one like this, I mark it "legal-nonconforming" and put a couple of asterisks after it, and a note to "See comment addendum."

That note tells them something like this: "I've marked the zoning as 'legal nonconforming' because that's what I think it is. But I'm not an attorney, and the actual legal status of a property should be determined by a law professional. This zoning classification requires 10 acres under current zoning regulations. The subject is only 5 acres, but was subdivided prior to enactment of the current zoning requirements. Subject is a SFR, and exhibits use, setback, height, and lot coverage which conform to current zoning.

I cannot state with certainty that the subject house could be rebuilt if damaged more than 50% by casualty loss, since such things are matters for the planning commission to decide on an individual basis. Their history in such matters is spotty and unpredictable."

IMO, just checking a box isn't enough in a situation like this.

 

[Kevin Mc]

Legal Nonconforming

If it doesn't conform to current zoning it is Legal Non-conforming. The local municipality may not call it that but I certainly would. That would be a textbook example in my market.

 

[Carnivore]

If it doesn't conform to current zoning it is Legal Non-conforming. The local municipality may not call it that but I certainly would. That would be a textbook example in my market.

What the muncipality zoning department says today is not always what they will say tomorrow. If you can not get it in writing then define it yourself like Jim Plante suggested. Remeber, its your butt thats on the line.

 

[Kevin Mc]

True....

What the muncipality zoning department says today is not always what they will say tomorrow. If you can not get it in writing then define it yourself like Jim Plante suggested. Remeber, its your butt thats on the line.

with the exception of some low density areas in my market, the zoning in the NYC metro area hasn't changed in many years, but getting a straight answer about rebuilds(they always call when you check the legal non-conform box) is tougher than getting blood from a rock.Good point, explain,explain,explain and if you can't get a definitive answer say as much. It isn't your job to be a soothsayer as to the future decisions of zoning boards.

 

[Joyce Potts]

IMO, it's legal, non-conforming.

It's the better choice of two evils, from a form standpoint.

The current site falls short of a rebuild as current zoning requires 1.5 acres.

If I'm understanding your post correctly. Why go out on a limb?

As a follow up to my original post, of course it should be thoroughly disclosed and explained in the report to put your client on notice of the 'complication' and potential higher risk factor.

 

[Ben Vukicevich SRA]

It depends on how the zoning ordinance reads.

The Fannie form is confusing because they sneak in the word "Use" by Grandfathered on the form.

Technically, it goes as follows out here: Your mileage may vary depending on how your zoning ordinance is set up.

USE is residential, commercial, industrial, etc.

The zoning districts will state what USE is allowed. A residential use in a residentially zoned area is a legal USE. You do not need a USE variance for a residential USE in a residentially zoned area. You would need a Use variance for a move-up from residential to say, a home office/professional use, etc in a residentially zoned area.

Inside the zoning districts are bulk schedules for each district. Those schedules will determine whether you have a non-conforming SITE or a non-conforming STRUCTURE.

My house is an approved residential USE for my zoning district. My lot is non-conforming and my structure is non-conforming. I needed a variance from the bulk schedule to violate the side yard requirements but not to build on the non-conforming lot, if I used the current set backs. I did not apply for a USE variance, only for relief from the bulk schedule.

They are building a new house directly across the street from me. The district requires a 70' front. The site has a 60' front. The proposed residential USE is legal. The site is non-conforming. The proposed structure will be conforming as I have not been notified of a variance request by the borough for relief from the bulk schedule. The new construction is a legal USE and will proceed without any variances.

I've sat on enough zoning board hearings as a member and as the chairman to know that the way appraisers think it should be "done" is not the way a zoning board looks at it. I handled ONE use variance the entire time I was on the zoning board and I never want to do that again. The meeting didn't get over until 2AM with people bugging out and screaming for 6 hours. All for a USE change to allow the placement of a surveyor's office in his house in a residential area. That's spot zoning and it's not allowed as it changes the character of the residential neighborhood.

So basically, every residential use in a residential zone is a legal USE. Then it comes down to whether you have a non-conforming site or a non-conforming structure as per the bulk schedule.

How you check the boxes on the 1004 is up to you, but I'd explain it all in the site section.

 

[Brad Ellis]

Ben,

"All for a USE change to allow the placement of a surveyor's office in his house in a residential area. That's spot zoning and it's not allowed as it changes the character of the residential neighborhood.

HUH? You guys really argued over a surveyor's office in his home? Sorry but that is nuts. Surveyors do not get their work by hanging out a sign and I have never known one who got walk-in trade. Wondering how that would change the nature of a residential neighborhood?

I had a similar row over having my office in my home. The suburb, for some still unknown reason, demanded the right to inspect my home to make sure I was not running a business out of it.

I told them to call my lawyer. He told them "bite me".

So, what are you not telling us about this surveyor's business? Gotta be something!

Brad

 

[Ben Vukicevich SRA]

Brad,

Ten surveying crews stopping by with their trucks/cars to pick up equipment, work assignments and pay checks at all hours of the day definitely PO'd the neighbors in the development. It was a zoo.

Allowable USE changes in a residential district are limited to professions that show some public need/good. Examples would be: Doctor, dentist, barber, hair dresser/beautician, etc.

Appraisers and surveyors don't make the cut. LOL. Although I will NEVER give up the legal non-conforming use at my father's house. He's retired but I occupy the office adjoining his home with my two trainee kids for free..can't beat that, along with free lunch, coffee, and free day care for my grandkid with my parents while my daughter works in the office. LOL. I'm even allowed to bring in a non-family member secretary, if I desire. Now that's a grandfathered USE, sorry for the pun. I couldn't resist.