What sort of rules have you run into regarding these?
I’ve seen “accessory use” defind as servant’s quarters, itinerant farm labor, un-paid night watchman, etc. but the local zoning boards are against the idea of a guest house or MIL suite since they “might be rented out”
Having a hard time finding definition of “Single Family” in our land use codes.
Any experience out there from builders, architects, inspectors, etc?
I realize that local rules are local and my mileage may vary, but I’m just asking for comparitive advice and experiences.
Replies
General rule for inspectors around here is that any room that can be used as a bedroom will be used as a bedroom. Also any additions, porches or out buildings that could be rented out or used as living space will be.
Generally, even if the original owner doesn't violate the intention of the labeling on the plans, and given the likely longevity of the structure, these assumptions have been shown to be true most of the time.
This applies to egress, wiring, septic tank capacity, minimum ceiling height, etcetera.
So does that limit the number of bedrooms based on the number of people in the family at the time the permit is filed?
I agree with the point that if it can be used as a BR, it should have, for example, an egress window and meet other applicable codes - but do they, in your area, disallow it expressly for the reason that might be rented out? I am not disputing the building codes, but rather the interpretation of the land use codes.
By the way - I know you are a long time poster here - we've talked before and you've given out great advice, but I don't know where you are from - no info in your profile - what part of the country - Just curious.
PS - I imagine that there are local land use codes out there that expressly prohibit "guest houses". But that is not the case with our codes. The definition of acceptable use of accessory structure says what I said before (servant's quarters, night watchman, etc) and is also preceeded by the phrase "including but not limited to the following"
I hope to hear many more considered and expereinced responses.
Thanks for responding.
Edited 8/16/2005 8:56 pm ET by jhausch
As I re-read my post I feel like I am coming across as an A**. I really did appreciate your reply. I was not clear in my original post that I meant land use code (alleged) violations, not building code issues.
Seriously, thanks for responding.
No problem.You didn't come off as anything but concerned and a little annoyed at the situation. Understandable in your case. Rules, both land use and codes, can be a PITA. Even when enforced by conscientious and well meaning officials they often appear to violate fairness. Sometimes common sense. Sometimes, even after looking into the details and understanding their concerns, they clearly do. Sometimes this has a lot to do with legislators who draft the rules. legislators who are almost uniformly unsoiled by technical skills or knowledge.Mostly the officials mean well. Anyone dealing with building officials would do well to remember that they are doing a job as well as they can in lousy conditions and under a lot of pressure from all sides. They are only human. Treating them well and trying to see their side can go a long way toward a favorable outcome in your particular case.To answer your question I'm down here in Florida. Where the builders own the commissioners, mayors and the governor, and have worked hard to defang the inspectors.
Bump - still fishing for insight.
Lawyer has not found the supporting caselaw yet.
Re: "Lawyer has not found the supporting caselaw yet."But he is willing to continue digging into it for as long as it takes. At $200, or more, and hour plus secretarial, incidental and copying costs.Gamble Rogers, one of the best pickin story tellers ever, had a line: 'It's easier to get forgiveness than it is to get permission'. I'm not sure how it applies but it feels like it might.
Luckily, I am dealing with a small town/country lawyer who hit me up for a whopping $500 retainer to cover his $125/hour fees. . .
Since I am in a mostly agrarian county, I did not want to bring in a "big city" lawyer in case this went to court here in our county.
I'd really like to "ask for forgiveness, rather than permission" on this one, but it would be near impossible. I know that when the inspector showed up to inspect the stakes for the permit, he'd see the garage with loft above (or, even worse, see it during a future visit with construction underway) and stop things cold. . . .
I know this because the same guy wanted to deny the permit on a project down the street where they were adding on to a house that had an old shed with "overflow" bunks above it. No plumbing, just electricity.
I am trying to play by the rules - we'll see where that gets us. . .
If you have not seen the attachment I put in my reply to WorkshopJon, take a look. Those land use codes made me feel better - they've defined Guesthouses as acceptable in areas zoned Single Family.
However, I also just found this - and this is not a good sign for trying to "work around the system" (be ready for a long read)
http://www.wisbar.org/AM/CustomSource/ASPCode/caseshow.asp?Hig=on&SearchTerm=Guest%2A+and+house%2A&urlpath=http://www.wisbar.org/res/capp/2002/02-0902.htm
I know this because the same guy wanted to deny the permit on a project down the street where they were adding on to a house that had an old shed with "overflow" bunks above it. No plumbing, just electricity.
Sounds to me that what you really need to know is not court decisions, but how it actually works in your community. Which is what I would have expected you to learn from a local attorney.
You assume that there are rules the permit guy has to follow and that you should be able to force him to follow those rules. What if that isn't the situation?
We're considerably more formal here, a major college town. But what happens, particularly in the zoning dept., is "interpretation". Often that interpretation will change over time. They're proud to say they don't change the rules, but that's exactly the effect.
Solution? The only one that works here is to find favor with the supervisor of the individual. Which might mean going outside the bureaucratic organization to those with more power, the county supervisors.
I'm getting screwed with what amounts to a zoning change resulting in assessment changes. Yup, an "interpretation" change. The first bill is 100x (not 100%) what we've been paying annually. And that's only the downpayment. I figured there wasn't much point fighting it. Being low-visibility has its advantages, which I enjoy.
Then I got a letter from a prominent surveyor, also personally affected, who's going to the board of supervisors on behalf of the 90 of us affected. It'll be interesting to see what he can do. I'm skeptical. He's got egg on his face from advising clients for many years about the issue. I structured a sale based on the old interpretation, which is now coming back at me. Trust me, you don't want the details.
In another area, where I was land-searching, I came across an assessor who was proud to point out that he was violating state law by keeping assessments a small fraction of "market value". What he said was: "they don't need the money". Blew me away. Apparently the county supervisors either 1)had no control over him, or 2) supported his actions to avoid dealing with tax rate issues.
As that memorable Yankee pointed out "all politics is local". Who's in charge?
Good luck. PAHS Designer/Builder- Bury it!
Put a pool next to it and call it a bathhouse.
I finished out my basement which has a "wet-bar" (Kitchenett with everything but a stove and range), and the basement bedroom rented out by a "boarder." (We share the same living space) ;-). It Satisfies the code and I can afford the mortgage payments without eating Ramen Noodles the rest of my life.
-Chief of all sinners
That is an interesting thought. Now, where is the number for that pool guy . . .
I'm on Long Island, in NY. They regulate everything here, to death. (If your grass is over 8", you can get a fine, etc.) The motto seems to be, let them catch me first, then I'll comply. Local inspectors do check the plumbing lines before they are covered, looking for hidden t's for future hookups.
I have other properties in southern Virginia. Rules are different. Take a 3 bedroom house, remove the closet and call it a sewing room and that's okay. Now it's a 2 bedroom for the perc tests and for building purposes. Somebody sleeps there, okay.
Two different areas, different interpretations. Advice here is good, but do yourself a favor and talk to a local architect or land use specialist. It's worth the cost of a meeting.
Don
Were talking to a lawyer now. He is looking for some case law that has someone building a guesthouse in an area zoned "single family". I hope to hear back from him by the end of the week.
I tried the meetings with the code folks and a variance board, but "ahem" we seem to differ on our interpretation of the land use codes. . . . all meetings have been civilized and I had the variance board "hold over" my ruling (then I called the lawyer). I, the whole time I was moving forward with these plans, I never thought I'd run into this. (long story short - when I built the structure, no inspections were required (no town) inspector , now that I am finishing it, there now is a town inspector.)
Reassuringly, the lawyer, when he first read all of the materials and information I gave him about our predicament commented, "why are you applying for a variance? You aren't violating the land use code"
We'll see. . . .
iot seems to me that if things changed after you built it, you are grandfathered
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
I understand that you are relating your local regs - I appreciate your input.
Here, we are on sewer, so I don't have to worry about septic. The sewer is actually a system where every 2 homes shares a grinder pump that puts the gravity fed waste into a smaller line to eventually take it to the treatment plant. (we are on a flowage/lake and the septic systems (as I have been told) didn't work that well so they did the sewer thing abouty 20 years ago)
I called the sanitary district and they have no problem with what I am doing, "you've already paid to get on the system, so go ahead".
As far as grandfathering goes, when we originally built the garage (pulled the permit for it), we built it as a garage. We knew it would be 2-3 years minimum before we would be ready to start the house. All we did at garage construction was to put un- connected waste and water lines under the footing and up through the slab. Although, after the structure was finished as a garage, and we built/finished the second/loft level out of cash flow, all the things we did were with the aim of building a safe, well insulated, building code compliant "loft."
As mentioned previously, there was no building inspector when we built the garage. The permits were primarily for tax and land use purposes. When I built, I thouroughly (SP?) read and followed the land use codes (placement, dim. limits, etc) - seeing that acceptable uses for accessory structures "included, but not limited to vehicle storage, servant's quarters, un-paid night watchman, itinerant farm labor, etc" I thought that guest house would not be a problem.
Anyhow - it seems that their position is that those definitions are for other areas than those zoned "Single Family". It is in the regs for other counties that I can find Guest House listed/allowed specifically under Single Family - but not here.
So, here I am - in a holding pattern. I might break the law and rent it out so we must protect me from myself. . .
Well, here's an update.
The town hurdle has been cleared! I presented my case and hung hard and fast on two main points: 1) Guesthouses, even thought not defined in their ordinances, are an accessory use and accessory uses are allowed "by right" (according to their ordinances). 2) Since the town does not define, allow, or prohibit guesthouses, it can be said that they are ambiguous on that point. I found WI case law at the appeals level that says that when the zoning ordinances are ambiguous, the ruling should be made in favor of free use of private property. . .
But - I ended by saying that "I understand how you want to keep control of these things, so I will accept your variance, conditional use permit, or deed restriction further defining the nature of the Guesthouse if you want to issue one."
Other points I conceeded ahead of time were to not put in cooking facilites so as to avoid the structure being called a dwelling (by their def. a dwelling contains cooking, sleeping, and sanitary facilities)
I ended up with a Deed Restriction that identifies it as a guesthouse. Prohibits cooking facilities. Defines temp occupancy as no more than 2 weeks at a time, no more than 5 times per year. And allows us to live in it during contstuction, but not past Jan 1, 2007.
Anyhow - WOOHOO!
Next hurdle is the county. They are more strict on this; however thier legal position is less stable than the towns since they define "servant's quarters" as an example of an accessory use. . . .
A friend of mine recently had an inlaw suite built onto his house. The primary limitation was that it could not have its own kitchen (because then it could be rented out). He had a "wet bar" put in. It has a small sink & a microwave.
we have this appliance in our warehouse. It has a stove, refrigerator and sink all in one unit,has wheels under it so it could move around.
The areas I have lived in (suburban D.C. and Columbus Ohio) generally allowed one "accesory" accomodation. Enlightned places realize that we have to be able to deal with elderly relatives when the need arises. If it gets rented out other times, so be it. As long as the infrastructure can support the population, why not?
The local cable company is not nearly so enlightned...
Had some experience with this about 4 yrs ago:
Go to apply for b permit w/ plans ( show in law apt over 3 car garage 0, w/ kitchen )
"You can't have two kitchens in the house." I say" what if it's a rec room?" "well ok, but it has to be connected to the house and can't have a door separating it from the rest of the house." "okey dokey" ( this is the same douchebag BI who told a 6'5" customer of mine that she couldn't have her kitchen counters @ 42" instead of 36" "Hud rules" "but it's not a hud mortgage!" "plumbing code" he says. "show me say I. " well, 42 is ok, but that's the maximum!" dickhead!
The fact of the matter is they just don't want you building an "in-law" and selling it as a two family. Best system I've seen is town lets you do what you want as far as in laws, sep entrances etc. , and there is an attachment to the deed that states that the house is a single fam house period.Most states have a law that basically says that w/ the exception of # of bedrooms, ( det by closet, egr windows, and ent doors)because of septic req.,the state has no right to determine the layout of your home. 4 kitchens, 7000sq ft bathroom, it's your $, do what you want, which is as it should be. (in case you havent figured it out, my bs line has been crossed 1 too many a time by BI s that make up the code as they go along)
Don't even get me going on "land taking" by emminent domain for "economic development.$*&%^!*&$*!
good luck
Just curious? Where are you located.
I am in CT. I have encountered this several times over the last 30 years. For the first 20 it was very limited or not allowed at all. But in the last 10 i believe that local governments have come under much pressure to allow them due to the ever changing economic and demographic factors.
In our area accesory units are usually allowed provided certain conditions are met. The major ones are:
They must be attached.
A maximum square footage, usually in the 800' range.
A doorway that connects the accesory unit to the main house.
A separate exterior entrance that cannot face the street.
I know of a few municipalities that require a notorized affidavit from the owners stating the relationship of the occupants. And this affidavit must be resubmitted every year. I know of one town that visits each home to check out the occupants every year.
A funny story on this subject. Several years ago I had a customer that wanted to put in a sink, mini-fridge,microwave and little two burner cooktop in their finished basement rec/family room, this was honestly just for them to be able to make some snacks while enjoying their room. This was coupled with some other work so they wanted me to get a permit, this was in June. We were told that they could not have a separate kitchen because that would constitute and in-law arrangement which was illegal. This was at the same time that the climate on this issue was changing and this town had an amnesty program in effect which stated that if you had an illegal in-law setup you could come in and apply for the permit and be issued a compliance certificate up until November 30th of that year and "legalize" your house.
Well my customer was naturally very upset and went in to see the inspector herself. She looked him straight in the eye and said, "now let me get this straight, so what you are telling me is that if I have my contractor come in and do all of this work without a permit and after he is done I come in before November 15th you will issue a permit and compliance certificate".
She left his ofice with her permit.
One more thing regarding someone mentioning septic tank size in a post on this subject.
I believe that this is throughout CT. In years past it was a given, if you were adding a bedroom you had to add on to your system. I like the alternative they have come up with. In some instaces it does create other problems but it seems the fairest way.
Now if your home has a septic system and you are increasing the footprint you no longer have to add to your system you simply have to prove that you can. Actually you have to show that the property can support a new code compliant system. The major concern being that your addition is not taking away valuable land that would be needed for a future repair. Let's face it modern systems are overdesigned being based on the max# of occupants for the bedrooms in the house, or actually 2 occupants per bedroom. In a 4 bedroom house that system is designed for 8 full time occupants. So when you want to add another bedroom on to a system that is designed for 8 and you have 4 or 5 and are adding on 1 or 2 more you are not really exceding the designed capacity. And don't forget that by the time you are adding on the other 1 or tow you are probably getting close to losing 1 or 2 of the original occupants (college). And hopefully they stay away.
Unfortuanetly porving that the lot can support a code compliant system can cost some $, test holes and sometimes engineering. That really stinks when all you want to do is add a $6,000 deck. But nonetheless it has saved countless homeowners from the more expensive system upgrade.
We have a similar system in maine for this probelm. The way it works here is that if you are adding a bedroom, you have the expanded waste water system designed by the soils engineer, then when you get your permit, the upgraded system is filed in the county with the deeed, as though it exists, so no-one can build anything within ten feet of that space. Then, if the system ever does fail, it gets rebuilt to that design.
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
How's it going Jim?
Best advice I can relate is to cozy up to the people who have to approve the project you plan. "Laws and provisions" aside, if you ask for advice from those individuals BEFORE you do anything, you would be surprised what you can get away with.
I don't know squat about how they are where you live, but give it a try. Ie. "what do you like to see and what do you frown upon", face to face before presenting any proposals in writing.
Jon
Things are good - considering.
How do you cozy up to someone that replies to "If someone wanted to put an apartment above a garage to live in while building a new home, what would they do?" With - "we don't allow that." ?
Hmm, now that you mention it - I think I see what you mean - I suppose the folks I would have to "Cozy up to" would be the ones on the variance boards. While I now understand where you are coming from, I doubt that I can crack the hardcase at the town meeting.
My presentation was thorough, complete, and respectful -but this guy would not have any of it - as mentioned before, he would not even accept temporary quarters until the house was built (followed by digging up the sewer connection and removing the plumbing fixtures). He said that if the plumbing was still connected that we'd rent it out and that if we did the tear out, they'd be faced with 50 more people in the next 5 years trying to do the same thing. . . .
I am hoping that someone with more money than I has built a guesthouse in an area zoned for single family and fought it all the way to a court decision.
We'll see. . . .
Belive it or not, look what I just found for Waukesha and Vilas counties. I never thought they would be on my side on this!
Here, there is no concern over what purpose it has, The term used is "dwelling unit"
by definition if it is designed, built, or used as a dwelling unit, it is consideered so.
by ordinance, you must have one and a half acres for each dwelling unit on the property, and the waste water system must be designed to a capacity according to the number of bedrooms that it serves, on the assumption that more bedrooms makes it possibel to hold more people and thuis, to generate more sewage.
I have a client with 2.49 acres who would love to turn the large room over his garage into a separate rental or MIL apartment. If the access is through his house, it could be considered part of the same dwelling unit since it would add not more total bedrooms, but if it is permanently closed off and the access is made from the exterior to that new efficiency apt, it would be by design and use, a separate dwelling unit, which is disallowed.
Since he wants the best of both worlds, every year, he asks me to design a way of buileding that gets around the law, and I tell him I can't do that.
Welcome to the
Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime.
where ...
Excellence is its own reward!