Working through a mid ordinance timing decision on an ADU conversion

An owner holding two single family rentals in the same city for years, doing nothing to either, and then facing a new ordinance that removes the parking requirement for accessory units and raises the size cap from 600 to 900 square feet effective at the start of next year, faces a real timing decision worth working through carefully. On a corner lot with alley access and an existing detached two car garage in decent shape, a conversion quote of $118k for 640 square feet two years ago might run closer to $135k today. Current rent on the house might be $2,050 with small unit comps around $1,500. On an interior lot with no alley and a 1940s house with a full basement and 7 foot ceilings, a basement conversion would need a lowered slab or a variance on ceiling height, and often nobody has bothered to quote it seriously. The genuinely tricky part is when an ordinance keeps an owner occupancy requirement in one section and appears to waive it in another for lots that were rentals before a certain date. A careful read might suggest the corner lot qualifies for the waiver and the interior lot does not, which can run backwards from where an owner would rather live. The actual decision comes down to permitting the garage conversion now under current rules, satisfying the parking requirement via the alley, versus waiting for the new rules and the larger size cap and risking that the owner occupancy language gets interpreted unfavorably. Where the interpretation of a mid ordinance transition clause is genuinely ambiguous, a short conversation with the planning department in writing, not just a phone call, is usually worth the delay before committing to either path.

3 replies

nicole_adeyemi SS3APRO 13

Two things. First, the conflicting sections are exactly what the planning department's counsel exists to resolve, and how a statute or ordinance applies to specific lots is a question for a land use attorney in that state, not a forum. An informal written interpretation from the zoning administrator is often available in a lot of jurisdictions, and that letter is typically what gets relied on at submission. Ask for it in writing, name both parcels, and cite both sections by number. Second, permitting under current rules to beat an ordinance change is a real strategy and it cuts both ways. Some ordinances include a vesting provision that ties an application to the rules in effect when it was accepted, which matters if the old rules are preferable. Say a garage footprint runs 640 square feet against a 600 foot cap already in place; that suggests a variance or a slightly smaller build would have been needed under the old rules anyway, which can settle the question on its own, ember's point about the numbers aside. Anchor, also worth checking whether the parking waiver is tied to transit proximity. Several cities wrote it that way, and it has caught people who assumed it was citywide.

nicole_adeyemi SS3APRO 13

kevin_lombardPassivePRO

I went through this twice before replying. Parcel, when you say vesting ties you to the rules at application, does that mean anchor could apply now and then withdraw if the new ordinance turns out better? Or does applying start a clock that costs something to abandon?

kevin_lombardPassivePRO

Working through a mid ordinance timing decision on an ADU conversion

3 replies