Adopt Resolution #18-166 Clarifying Lawful, Non-Conforming Use on the Property Identified as PID #22-32-25-23-0002

The property identified by PID #22-32-25-23-0002 (the "Subject Property"), which is located at the southeast corner of Ramsey Blvd and Alpine Drive, has an existing accessory building but no principal structure.  A single owner previous owned this parcel and the adjacent parcel with the primary dwelling jointly. The existing accessory structure pre-dates current accessory structure regulations. The parcels have now been sold separately, created a non-conforming issue. The City avoids this situation under existing regulations by not allowing accessory structures on separate parcels, regardless of common ownership at the time.

Presently, City Code Section 117-349 (d) (2) states that no accessory building shall be constructed on any lot prior to the time of construction of a principal building.  The Subject Property is for sale and City Staff have fielded multiple inquiries on this parcel, primarily about potential commercial uses.  There is a sale pending with the buyer interested in utilizing the building for primarily for personal storage but also to conduct motor vehicle repairs on the Subject Property.

No notification is required.

The Subject Property is about 3.2 acres in size and is zoned R-1 Residential (Rural Developing).  The surrounding parcels range in size from about 0.4 acres to just over 4.5 acres and are all zoned R-1 Residential (Rural Developing) as well.  The Building Permit indicates that the original accessory building was to 1,944 square feet in size (36' x 54'), which does comply with the square footage allotment for the size of the Subject Property.  However, it appears that the accessory building was expanded at some point as it is now approximately 3,024 square feet (56' x 54'), which exceeds what is allowed by City Code.  There is no evidence of a Building Permit for this expansion in the Property File.  However, the City did acquire a portion of the Subject Property to facilitate construction of Alpine Drive.  Prior to that, the Subject Property was closer to five (5) acres in size and it appears that the square footage of the accessory building would have been compliant if not for the land acquisition for right of way.  Thus, it appears that the size of the building could be considered lawful, non-conforming.

The existing accessory building was constructed in 1977 after issuance of a Building Permit.  At that time, the Subject Property and the adjacent property (with a home on it), located at 15443 Ramsey Blvd, were owned by one individual and the building location was approved by the City.  Over time, the Subject Property was sold separately from the home at 15443 Ramsey Blvd and now is a stand-alone, lawful non-conforming property due the existence of an accessory building with no principal structure. 

It appears that some sort of vehicle repair work and/or salvage operation previously occurred unlawfully on the Subject Property (past code enforcement letters regarding junk vehicles and cannabilized parts were found in the Property File).  That dates back to the early 1990s.  Even if that past use (motor vehicle repair) had been lawful, non-conforming, it appears that it has not occurred on the Subject Property for at least twelve (12) months, which voids that designation.

After conferring with the City Attorney, use of the accessory building for personal storage is permitted.  Any commercial type of use though does not appear to comply with City Code based on the zoning designation and the Home Occupation standards.  Furthermore, within the Property File, there is a signed letter from the individual that originally constructed the accessory building stating that the building was to be used exclusively for the storage of personal property and that no business operation shall be conducted there.

There are at least two (2) other properties within the city with similar circumstances (accessory building with no principal structure).  It is likely that Staff will bring forward a similar case to address those at a future date.  However, there is a closing scheduled for August 12, 2018 for the purchase of the Subject Property and the buyer is seeking resolution to how the building can legally be used (see attached letter from buyer).  The interested buyer has noted that he works on vehicles 'on the side' and not as a full time job.  He has stated that his desire is to move the vehicles he is working on out of his neighborhood and into this accessory building.

Alternatives

Alternative #1: Confirm use of the accessory building on the Subject Property for personal storage only.  The accessory building was designed for personal storage and was compliant when it was orginally constructed.  The fact that it now is on a parcel with no principal building (Subject Property was sold into separate ownership) should not result in an improper (non-compliant) use today.  This is an existing accessory building that was lawfully constructed and allowing its use for personal storage seems appropriate without changing the character of the surrounding neighborhood.  As long as the accessory building is used only for personal storage and there is no vehicle repair work, even of personal vehicles, conducted on the Subject Property, Staff would support this alternative.

Alternative #2: Direct Staff to inform potential buyers and the seller that there shall be no use of the existing accessory building until such time that a principal building (home) is constructed on the Subject Property.  The accessory building was lawfully constructed and only later was the land sold into separate ownership creating the non-conformity.  Also, locating a home on the Subject Property may be challenging based on the depth of the parcel (roughly 120 feet), the required front and rear yard setbacks (forty [40] feet each), and the location of the existing accessory building.  Use of the accessory building for its designed purpose (personal storage) seems a reaonable approach.  After conferring with the City Attorney, Staff does not support this alternative.

This case is being handled as part of Staff's regular duties.

Staff recommends confirming the use of the accessory building strictly for personal storage only, at least until such time a home is constructed on the Subject Property.

Motion to adopt Resolution #18-166 confirming allowable uses of the accessory building on the Subject Property.