Skip to content
Real Estate Deal Analysis & Advice

User Stats

77
Posts
46
Votes
Thomas Mattausch
  • Investor
  • Seattle, WA
46
Votes |
77
Posts

Proving Established Use / Grandfathered Status

Thomas Mattausch
  • Investor
  • Seattle, WA
Posted Dec 29 2016, 11:11

Hello BP! This is one part success story, one part discussion prompt. 

This morning I threw a hail mary and it went for a touchdown! Didn't even have to push the defender to the ground, as you normally do in a hail mary - trigger warning, Packers fans ;)

I had been challenged by the land use permit planner when my architect applied for substantial renovations to a grandfathered duplex in a single family zone. In Seattle, to prove established (grandfathered, legal) use, you must show a permit for the use, or prove that the use existed prior to 1957, which has been established as a sort of "ancient amnesty" date. 

I put on my researcher hat, paid for a $25 for a 100 article archives subscription to the text searchable Seattle Times database, typed the house and street numbers inside quotes, and got to readin'. 

First, I was thrilled to discover that the proprietor of the "Seattle Grandmothers' Club" resided at our house. 

Fantastic! And useless. But look at that hat!

The next big discovery, however, was a slam dunk!

Dare I say... Boomshakalaka!

It is not completely airtight as they could ask for proof it was used as a separate apartment and not used by the homeowner. However, it's quite strong proof and I'm hopeful it will be accepted. 

Also, one other interesting note that I saw in the agencies' tip sheet on establishing use is this passage: 

"If a use not allowed under the current zoning commenced under permit, or a permit for the use has been granted and has not expired, or substantial progress has been made toward construction of a structure to be occupied by the use, then Seattle DCI recognizes the use as “established” in our records, and therefore legally nonconforming."

That bolded phase is quite curious! Does this scenario presume that potentially erroneous permits were issued prior to construction? Prima facie, it doesn't say that, just that you have to get a bunch of progress done towards building what you want to have there. 

Just wanted to share that lucky find this morning, and ask for any other anecdotes or strategies for proving continuous use in Seattle or elsewhere.