02-23-2004 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Accessory Structures April 23.1997 Page 3 The problem here is that the only permanent fixture in a kitchen may be a kitchen sink, and a lavatory in a bathroom might serve the same function. Typical Accesssory Building Utility Amenities It is not uncommon for accessory buildings to be provided with electricity, not only for lighting but for many other purposes (lawn maintenance, workshop, etc.). A telephone jack might also be placed in an accessory building for convenience. Less common would be natural gas, except for heating purposes. Water piping might be common in an accessory building for someone who is a gardener, with a washtub or sink area. A home workshop in an accessory building might include a toilet and lavatory for convenience. Much less common in an accessory building is a shower or bathtub. Such a fixture technically would require a permit from the City, and is perhaps the single 'built-in' feature most likely to make a building suitably functional as astand-alone dwelling. In our society, where the majority of individuals tend to bathe on a regular basis, the absence of a shower or tub suggests a space that, even if provided with most other amenities, is not intended for anything more than short term use accessory to a building that has such a facility. Without a tub or shower, it is not livable. Bythesametoken, withoutatoilet.itisnotlivable. Yet the presence of a shower stall in an unheated garage for seasonal or occasional use by the homeowner to remove the grime from a hard day 'in the coal mines', hardly would constitute a separate dwelling unit in itself. This suggests that perhaps a shower or tub in combination with a toilet is necessary to comprise a functional, if not necessarily legal, dwelling unit... It may therefore be reasonable to define whether a structure or space is a (potential) dwelling unit by the presence or absence of a bathtub or shower in combination with a toilet. Restrictive Covenant: Alternative to CUP? We need a useful policy statement on what fixtures can be allowed in an accessory building without requiring a Guest House CUP. The policy becomes more difficult to define now that the Council has in at least one case allowed an accessory building to contain a shower and a toilet, with a covenant filed in the title stating that the building may not be used as "an alternative living space, guest house, secondary residential unit, mother-in-law apartment, rental structure, or the like." Council apparently has taken the position that even though an accessory structure has the amenities to be used as a second dwelling unit (i.e. it looks and smells and feels and tastes like a guest house), the determinant of whether it needs a CUP is the owner's intended use of the structure. And, if the owner does not intend to use it as a guest house even though it can easily function as one. a covenant filed in the title stating the owner agrees to not use it as a dwelling presumably at least gives the City the right to sue for breach of covenant if it is in fact used as a dwelling unit. The covenant also notifies future owners of the property that dwelling use is not allowed.