Zoning interpretation

[driftpin]

You may need to submit, and see what the comments on the development plan are, if they turn it down. They should cite the code under which it fails, if in-fact it does. That's how I was required to document my rejection of a plan. At that point, you at-least have something to look-at, for compliance. As mentioned, it comes down to their interpretation, but if you can show them where according to their land development code and the adopted building code your structure meets criteria, they should issue the permit.

 

[Radix2]

I went through this, and the definition was better written here - the requirement was that to be attached, the requirement was the shared wall must be conditioned liveable space.

Some of the local code you are quoting is confusing - if you put quote marks around what the law says, it would be easier to tell it apart from your statements.

It says that the breezeway, etc. is part of and complies with the house requirement, not as an accessory building, ok, that is the normal case.

Are there any other language that talks about construction specifically attached to breezeway or non-habitable space?

Usually there is something like that - to avoid garages attached only by breezeway or attaching more house on the other side of garages.

What I ended up doing is adding living space and continuing on with the garage from that. It would mean basically heating your breezeway and putting in outlets, etc.

 

[Orionrising]

careful though, they may then make the garage subject to nasty thinks about energy efficiency, and blower door tests etc depending on your code cycle.

 

[Voi]

Myself and the zoning administrator are not understanding the terminology the same on the height restriction of 14 feet for a accessory building. I say once it becomes attached to the house with the breezeway it becomes part of the primary structure, then the height restriction is 35 feet, he says no height restriction is still 14 feet.

I do have a copy of the local zoning laws and have read it many times. Here is how it reads.
"breezeways, as an attachment between the garage or carport and the main building, shall be considered a part of the main building, but shall not be considered livable floor space."

Any update on this?

In a similar but different situation.

When I tried to add an 'attached' garage I was told for it to be attached it has to share a wall with 'conditioned space' per 2012 IRC.....so I built a detached garage with a breezeway....of course the HOA considers it attached due to the breezeway....

So the breezeway has to be part of the home's HVAC system or can it be conditioned separately?

 

[fairway605]

Any update on this?

In a similar but different situation.



So the breezeway has to be part of the home's HVAC system or can it be conditioned separately?

The zoning board agreed with my interpretation, once it becomes attached to the house structurally it doesn't matter how or what you call it then its no longer an accessory building it is part of the main building, so it falls under the zoning laws for the main building. No it doesn't have to be conditioned at all.

 

[The Tool Tyrant]

The zoning board agreed with my interpretation, once it becomes attached to the house structurally it doesn't matter how or what you call it then its no longer an accessory building it is part of the main building, so it falls under the zoning laws for the main building. No it doesn't have to be conditioned at all.

Wow, what do you know...common sense wins one! Great to hear!

 

[Voi]

The zoning board agreed with my interpretation, once it becomes attached to the house structurally it doesn't matter how or what you call it then its no longer an accessory building it is part of the main building, so it falls under the zoning laws for the main building. No it doesn't have to be conditioned at all.

That's good to hear. Was this all handled via phone/letters/email or more of a suit and tie situation in front of the board?

 

[finn]

It's the UP.

We don't wear suits and ties, except sometimes for weddings and funerals.

 

[rslaback]

The zoning board agreed with my interpretation, once it becomes attached to the house structurally it doesn't matter how or what you call it then its no longer an accessory building it is part of the main building, so it falls under the zoning laws for the main building. No it doesn't have to be conditioned at all.

I'm glad that you're happy and that the zoning board is happy. That said, I can see that decision (and precedent) coming back to bite them in the **** pretty hard.

 

[fairway605]

It's the UP.

We don't wear suits and ties, except sometimes for weddings and funerals.

You got that right.