|
| Author |
Message |
mojo43
Member
|
# Posted: 5 Apr 2012 15:21
Reply
Hello, I was looking for some advice...
We have a lot in the Greater Madawaska in Ontario which has an outhouse and a shed currently on it. The shed is starting to fall apart and I read in their bylaws that you can repair an existing building if it is damaged due to fire, flood or wind.
We really want to build a bunkie and I was thinking that who says that this shed isn't a bunkie? Can I not just rebuild the "burned down" bunkie.
I guess I am heading down a path that I really don't want to because we would like to have a bunkie and can't afford anything else. The shed looks aweful but we are in a residential/cottage type area and very open so everyone can see.
I will be calling the municipality, but I just wanted to stay off of the radar for now and get some ideas before making that phone call.
Has anyone tried something like this?
|
|
spee
Member
|
# Posted: 5 Apr 2012 15:56
Reply
you can try it,,,, but if they are sticklers ... they can tell you to tear it down
|
|
MtnDon
Member
|
# Posted: 5 Apr 2012 16:07
Reply
I would check on how the regs are worded. Here in NM if you reach the point of replacing 50% or more of the original structure, you need permits and whatever other hoops they lay out for you.
|
|
toyota_mdt_tech
Member
|
# Posted: 5 Apr 2012 16:48
Reply
Quoting: mojo43 Can I not just rebuild the "burned down" bunkie.
I like your way of thinking. On the same page. 
|
|
hattie
Member
|
# Posted: 5 Apr 2012 20:54
Reply
Whatever you do, DON'T tear anything down until you find out! If they will allow this, it could save you lots of hassle and money. Locals here in BC have been doing just that for years!!
|
|
soundandfurycabin
Member
|
# Posted: 6 Apr 2012 17:59
Reply
One issue is that the local zoning bylaws likely don't allow bunkies if there isn't a main house/cabin. In that case an existing bunkie would be a non-conforming use. You might be able to get the non-conforming bunkie "grandfathered" but it would probably require two things:
1. Proof that the building was there before the bylaw prohibiting bunkies came into force.
2. Proof that the building has a history of being used for overnight accommodation. ex. photos or written testimonials from friendly neighbors and the previous owners. Does it have windows or any other feature to suggest that it wasn't just a storage shed? The presence of the outhouse is one indication that people might have stayed there overnight.
I would NOT burn it down without getting sound legal advice. Grandfathering of a non-conforming use often ends when the building is destroyed beyond repair. A replacement might have to conform to all current laws. If you can't convince the municipality that it was a bunkie, your best bet is probably to fix it up into a really nice shed for storing all your camping gear.... cots and sleeping bags, campstove, tent heater etc.
|
|
mojo43
Member
|
# Posted: 6 Apr 2012 20:32
Reply
Thanks a lot for all of the helpful replies. I found this in the bylaws:
I believe this means that the "bunkie" can remain as is.
3.16.2 Continuation of Existing Uses
Nothing in this By-law shall prevent the use of any land, building or structure for any purpose prohibited by the By-law if such land, building or structure was lawfully used for such purpose on the day of passing of the By-law, so long as it continues to be used for that purpose.
And, I am pretty sure this means that I can rebuild the whole building.
3.16.3 Repair of Existing Buildings
If a non-conforming building or structure should be damaged by fire, flood, wind, earthquake, or other natural or unnatural occurrence beyond the owners control, nothing in this By-law shall prevent such a building from being restored and strengthened to a safe condition, provided the height, size or volume is not increased and provided that reconstruction or restoration is commenced within twelve months and completed within twenty-four months of the date on which the damage took place.
I think I will just call the municipality and ask if I can rebuild the bunkie. It sounds pretty clear to me now that I have read the bylaw that I am allowed to rebuild it, but I guess they can fine me if they choose. I just wish it would be easier to build a bunkie!!
|
|
mojo43
Member
|
# Posted: 6 Apr 2012 20:37
Reply
Quoting: soundandfurycabin 2. Proof that the building has a history of being used for overnight accommodation. ex. photos or written testimonials from friendly neighbors and the previous owners. Does it have windows or any other feature to suggest that it wasn't just a storage shed? The presence of the outhouse is one indication that people might have stayed there overnight. I would NOT burn it down without getting sound legal advice. Grandfathering of a non-conforming use often ends when the building is destroyed beyond repair. A replacement might have to conform to all current laws. If you can't convince the municipality that it was a bunkie, your best bet is probably to fix it up into a really nice shed for storing all your camping gear.... cots and sleeping bags, campstove, tent heater etc.
So I think that those bylaws mean that I can rebuild the whole bunkie. Is that what you read into it as well?
To answer your question, yes there is a window but it is in rough shape and looks like a shed. Nonetheless I guess I can just build another shed and put my cot in there. I can't see them coming to my place on the weekend to fine me because I am sleeping there?
|
|
|
soundandfurycabin
Member
|
# Posted: 7 Apr 2012 04:15
Reply
From the section on repair, I agree that you could most likely repair and restore the building. Note that it refers to "damaged", not "destroyed", and to "restored and strengthened", not "replaced".
Is there any possibility of building a privacy fence to keep nosy neighbors from seeing what you do there? Maybe pitch a cheap tent in the yard so people assume you sleep outside.
|
|
Anonymous
|
# Posted: 7 Apr 2012 17:45
Reply
As to one of your original questions, 'who says this shed isn't a bunkie', the answer is that ultimately the building official determines this. The issue is use- a storage shed is an entirely different use from a 'bunkie', or residence. The law allows the building official to look at a given structure and determine which use it is being put to by current residents, and therefore which set of rules applies to it.
Note that the 'Continuation of existing uses' allows only the continuation of the original use, not any other use. So the advice of one responder that you may need to try to prove how it was used in the past may be relevant, but note that the ordinance says that only a lawful use may be continued. So, if the building official determines that the use of the building in the past was unlawful, you can't continue that unlawful use in the present.
Note that the repair of existing buildings ordinance applies only to damaging events beyond the owners control, such as fire, earthquake, wind etc. This does not cover repairs, which will inevitably be considered 'remodels' if they constitute any sort of improvement beyond simply nailing back in place existing boards or painting or fixing broken glass or patching roof leaks.
I definitely do not think that these ordinances constitute permission to 'rebuild the entire bunkie'. If you ask the building department what they think, be prepared to live with the answer because you will now be on their radar. I suggest you do minor repairs, nothing that looks new, and don't open the can of worms. If you have neighbors that can see what you are doing, someone of them may take an issue with what you are doing and call in a complaint, whereupon the building department must, by law, respond and take action if a violation exists.
If you call the building department and ask if you can 'rebuild' the building you will be raising a huge red flag. I suggest you call them and find out if you can build another building, and what sort of rules they have regarding that. Where I am, you can 'camp' on your property in pretty much any structure so long as you do not stay over a certain length of time. 2 weeks without a septic, 4 months if you do have a septic. Beyond that you have to have a legal R-3 residence, expensive to build.
Perhaps you can 'rebuild' the existing shed under these rules, but why bother when you may be able to build a new separate building and keep the shed too. Do the repairs required on the shed and keep it for storage (as someone suggested).
-A building inspector
|
|
mojo43
Member
|
# Posted: 8 Apr 2012 13:34
Reply
Thanks for all of the responses. It really helps to hear someone else's take on reading the bylaws. I have to re-read them a bunch of times to understand 
Quoting: Anonymous I suggest you do minor repairs, nothing that looks new, and don't open the can of worms
I would like to do this, but the shed is in a really bad state. The wood is rotting, the base is sitting on the ground. I think it would harder to fix it then to rebuild unfortunately.
Quoting: Anonymous f you call the building department and ask if you can 'rebuild' the building you will be raising a huge red flag. I suggest you call them and find out if you can build another building, and what sort of rules they have regarding that.
I have called in the past as an anonymous potential land buyer in the area and they told me that no building can be built until there is a main residence built. 
Quoting: soundandfurycabin Is there any possibility of building a privacy fence to keep nosy neighbors from seeing what you do there? Maybe pitch a cheap tent in the yard so people assume you sleep outside.
I actually have a pop up tent trailer up there now. It was last year's solution, but we would prefer to have something like a bunkie so we could put a small stove in and use it in the autumn as well as the spring. We are unfortunately in the open as all of the trees around us are very tall with the leaves up top.
I think I'll call and try to remain anonymous again and see what they say. I will take your advice and stick with saying that it is a shed since a bunkie is not lawful. I really hope that they will understand that the shed is falling over and is an eye sore. I would assume that the neighbors would want it rebuilt??
Thanks again...
|
|
anan
|
# Posted: 8 Apr 2012 18:17
Reply
the neighbors may prefer to see it gone.
They probably jumped through all the hoops imposed by the building/zoning folks and so would expect you to do so as well.
|
|
Anonymous
|
# Posted: 9 Apr 2012 22:33
Reply
'No building can be built til a main residence is built'?? That totally S*C*S!!
|
|
mojo43
Member
|
# Posted: 10 Apr 2012 11:19
Reply
I don't believe it... I just got off the phone with the building inspector and I am allowed to rebuild the shed so long as it is under 108 square feet and it is not on any lot lines.
I am very happy!
|
|
MtnDon
Member
|
# Posted: 10 Apr 2012 11:35 - Edited by: MtnDon
Reply
very cool!! Shows why it can be best to ask the officials. Now you can do it without worrying / stressing about what might happen if "they" find out.
|
|
mojo43
Member
|
# Posted: 10 Apr 2012 13:06
Reply
Ya, I am very excited. He also told me that the roof overhang counts towards the square footage of the place. I was planning on having a loft. Do you know if that will count towards the square footage as well? I would assume that a deck off of the place would count??
Thanks in advance...
|
|
adakseabee
Member
|
# Posted: 10 Apr 2012 15:50
Reply
In my neck of the woods (SE Virginia), residential zoning allows a second structure (shed/garage/etc) not to exceed 500 SF. Area on a second floor (loft) is included in the limitation if the distance from the floor of the second floor (loft) to the bottom of the ridge rafter is 72 inches or greater. Additionally, no plumbing is allowed in the second building, ostensibly to preclude someone from using it as a residence. There is no limit on the size of a deck or patio. My advice is for you to ask the responsible official in your area as there are as many interpretations of what is allowed as there are municpalities with bureaucrats to interpret the rules.
|
|
MtnDon
Member
|
# Posted: 10 Apr 2012 18:36
Reply
There is no nationwide rule(s). Some places like NM only count the actual floor footprint, not the eves; though a loft increases what they count.
|
|
morock
|
# Posted: 10 Apr 2012 22:34
Reply
We went through all this "nothing until a main building" stuff five years ago and purchased a yurt. It was a portable type, set it up in the spring and took it down at Thanksgiving. Everyone on the lake thought it was cool so no issues. Built a building last year, really going to miss the yurt this year.
|
|
Anonymous
|
# Posted: 10 Apr 2012 22:45
Reply
A lot of the rules are written and endorsed by people who are already land owners and have spent $$ to build nice places. They don't want sheds sprouting up and spoiling the neighborhood, potentially affecting resale and prices. Along the lines of why mobile homes are not permitted in many zoned developments with conventional residential construction.
|
|
|
