Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Planning Legal Guidance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Staff briefs commission on nonconforming uses, zoning estoppel and covenants; guidance provided on rebuilding and abandonment rules
Summary
Planning staff reviewed municipal rules and case law on nonconforming uses, zoning estoppel and covenants, explaining rebuild timelines, abandonment rules and limits on expanding nonconforming uses.
Planning staff summarized several technical topics in a staff update: nonconforming uses, zoning estoppel, and covenants, conditions and restrictions (CC&Rs).
On nonconforming uses, staff explained that a property use lawfully established before current zoning can remain even if it no longer conforms to the code. If a nonconforming structure is destroyed, staff said owners generally may rebuild, but local rules and case law set limits; staff indicated a one‑year standard is commonly applied for demonstrating continued intent and to pull permits, though staff said they would verify whether the one‑year clock refers to permit submittal or active work on rebuilding in specific cases.
On abandonment, staff said the city treats a nonconforming use as abandoned if it is discontinued for more than 12 months; uses stopped for less than a year can often be resumed under the nonconforming status, but longer interruptions typically end that protection.
Commissioners and staff discussed whether a nonconforming use may be expanded. Staff said the general rule is that expansions are disfavored, though limited exceptions exist in Midvale's form‑based code to allow small, tightly defined expansions in downtown/form‑based areas where many properties became nonconforming upon adoption of new standards.
Staff reviewed zoning estoppel—where an owner reasonably relies on an action or approval by the city (for example, an erroneous permit issuance) and has invested significantly in reliance on that action—and noted that courts weigh the applicant's clean hands and the amount invested when deciding whether the city can be estopped from later enforcing the code.
On CC&Rs and homeowners associations, staff noted that CC&Rs are private contract instruments that create and authorize HOAs; enforcement and remedies differ from public law, though both can create liens and financial obligations that affect property owners.
Staff answered commissioner questions and said they would follow up with specific legal clarifications where necessary.
