No permit

[J Grant]

I agree with Mark, the zoning allows what is on the property, a sep issue that the owner did not get permits to build .

 

[CANative]

OP, are you aware of CA's Second Unit Law?

And just because a person did not complete the administrative process of obtaining necessary permits does not mean that the improvements are an illegal use of the land.

Don't blow this one off. Figure out what you've got there, what the zoning means, how the improvements fit in the market, etc., etc.

What area is this?

 

[cjski]

OP, are you aware of CA's Second Unit Law?

And just because a person did not complete the administrative process of obtaining necessary permits does not mean that the improvements are an illegal use of the land.

Don't blow this one off. Figure out what you've got there, what the zoning means, how the improvements fit in the market, etc., etc.

What area is this?

The 2nd unit law simplifies the process of constructing an ADU...right?

The subject property is located in the unincorporated area of East Los Angeles.

 

[CANative]

You can almost certainly have one ADU, the second ADU might be a problem. We can't really solve this on the internet. You need to get a really good description of exactly what's there and then call the County Planning and Building Department. You probably won't need to disclose the exact address or parcel number but you could probably describe the book and page number so the duty planner can dial in what's permitted and what's not.

PM me the AP # and County if you like and I'll do a little research. I'm in San Bernardino County but I do this stuff all over the state.

 

[huntercharlie]

Please post the Fannie, USPAP or other recognized appraisal definition of Highest and Best Illegal Use? Thanks.

I'm not sure what your point is. Based on the OP's description the zoning allows for these structures (which may or may not be H&BU), however, they appear to have been constructed without permits that, at least in my area, would make them illegal with a very high probability that the governing municipality would require them to be removed, brought to code with the applicable permit process or, if your lucky, maybe they'd just let you convert them to storage buildings with an agreeement that they will not be utilized as living space.

 

[CANative]

They predate current zoning ordinances. There are some other issues the OP needs to look into.

But even if they didn't predate the ordinance the current zoning allows this use:

Zone R-3: Limited Multiple Residence
Permitted Uses:

Apartment houses, uses permitted in Zone R-1 and R-2 (22.20.260 - 22.20.290)

Minimum Required Area (Unless otherwise specified):

5000 sq. ft./lot (22.52.100)
1452 sq. ft./unit or as otherwise limited by the General Plan (22.20.310 and 22.20.060)

Maximum Height Limit:

35 feet from existing or excavated grade (22.20.300)

Minimum Required Parking:

Each bachelor apartment unit, 1 covered space
Each efficiency or 1 bedroom apartment unit, 1 1/2 covered spaces
Each 2 bedroom apartment unit, 1 1/2 covered + 1/2 uncovered spaces
See R-1 and R-2 zones
Guest parking required for apartments with a minimum of 10 units at a ratio of 1 space for each 4 units (22.52.1180 and 22.20.330)

Standard Yard Requirements:

Front Yard: 15 ft., except as provided (22.20.320)
Rear Yard: 15 ft. or 20% of average depth of lot, not less than 10 ft. (22.20.320 and 22.48.110)
Side Yards: Interior Lot: 5 feet or 10% of average width of narrow lot, but not less than 3 feet (22.20.320 and 22.48.100) Corner Lot: 5 ft., except on reversed corner lot, which is 7 1/2 feet (22.20.320)

 

[Mike Kennedy]

I'm not sure what your point is. Based on the OP's description the zoning allows for these structures (which may or may not be H&BU), however, they appear to have been constructed without permits that, at least in my area, would make them illegal with a very high probability that the governing municipality would require them to be removed, brought to code with the applicable permit process or, if your lucky, maybe they'd just let you convert them to storage buildings with an agreeement that they will not be utilized as living space.

You made my point. Thanks. The same result may, or may not be applicable to the Subject in the OPs market. Simply because Fannie is willing to buy loans on illegal properties does not relieve an Appraiser from the ethical responsibility of NOT violating Fannies' own contradictory HABU requirement nor the USPAP requirement of HABU which must be a legally permissible use as of an Effective Date of Appraisal.

 

[CANative]

You made my point. Thanks. The same result may, or may not be applicable to the Subject in the OPs market. Simply because Fannie is willing to buy loans on illegal properties does not relieve an Appraiser from the ethical responsibility of NOT violating Fannies' own contradictory HABU requirement nor the USPAP requirement of HABU which must be a legally permissible use as of an Effective Date of Appraisal.

Where do you get the idea that there is an illegal use?

 

[cjski]

Where do you get the idea that there is an illegal use?

Hence, the disagreement between my brother and I...

 

[Mike Kennedy]

Where do you get the idea that there is an illegal use?

a quick Google seach (different Jurisdiction) result illustrates one Legal Ruling example, there are many more in California if one wishes to google for them:

a California Court Decision

"unlawful" = illegal

http://activerain.com/blogsview/112...s-rents-not-collectible-for-unpermitted-units