Planning Violations and the Adjustment Review Process
In some cases, site constraints such as lot size, topography, or surrounding development can make it difficult or even impossible for a property owner to comply with all of the zoning code standards. Additionally, property owners may inherit work completed without a permit from a previous owner that does not meet Title 33 standards, the city’s zoning code. This is where the Adjustment Review process comes into play, as it provides a mechanism for property owners to request variances, exceptions, or modifications to certain land use regulations or development standards.
The city of Portland's Adjustment Review process is a mechanism by which property owners can request an adjustment to certain land use regulations or development standards. This process is designed to provide flexibility to the land use regulations and standards in certain situations, while also ensuring that the intent and purpose of the regulations are still met.
The Adjustment Review process allows property owners to request variances, exceptions, or modifications to certain land use regulations or development standards. Examples of requests that may be considered include: reducing setback requirements, increasing building height limitations, reducing required parking spaces, or allowing smaller lot sizes.
To begin the Adjustment Review process, property owners must submit an application to the Bureau of Development Services (BDS). The application must include a detailed description of the proposed adjustment, as well as documentation to support the request. The BDS will review the application and determine whether it meets the criteria for an Adjustment Review. The Adjustment Review process is subject to certain timelines and fees. Property owners must submit their application within a certain timeframe, and fees must be paid at the time of application. The amount of the fees is based on the type and number of adjustments being requested.
It is important to note that the Adjustment Review process is not intended to be used to circumvent land use regulations or development standards. The process is designed to provide flexibility in certain situations, while still ensuring that the intent and purpose of the regulations are met.
That is where Full Stop Design Studio comes in. We have handled numerous cases where development proposals could not meet the standards of the zone. The following case studies 1 and 2 demonstrate how we were able to champion the adjustment process for our clients to achieve the desired results.
Adjustment reviews, though, can also be lengthy and expensive depending on their complexity. At times, it may be advantageous to consider how to modify the structure to meet planning requirements and avoid an adjustment review altogether. In our third case study, we look at how some property research and quick thinking allowed a property owner to legalize a detached ADU and sell their property without code violations. We demonstrate through all three case studies that we were able to apply our deep understanding of codes, our ability to conduct robust property research, and leveraging of property assets to achieve approvals for our clients.
Case 1: NW SAVIER STUDIO
Our clients, purchased a lovely Victorian in Northwest Portland on a very narrow lot. The home was built before the city’s zoning code existed! In historic areas of Portland, it’s common that the existing development is non-conforming with current codes. Often, existing non-conforming development, particularly where setbacks or lot coverage is concerned, prohibits new development from bringing the property further out of conformance. Because of this, it makes it difficult to make design proposals that both make sense with the existing development and meet zoning requirements. In this case, our client wanted to create a backyard studio. Because the lot was so narrow, the side and rear setbacks would have made a legal building too narrow to make sense. Additionally, because of the small lot size, the house was already over the maximum coverage. For these reasons, we underwent an adjustment review process where we requested adjustments to the setback standards and lot coverage standards.
Case 2: N WILLAMETTE SCENIC CORRIDOR GARAGE
Our client, Ronnie, purchased a home with an existing 20’x20’ garage. Due to their storage needs, they decided to undergo the reasonable process of expanding their garage to include a side storage room. The homeowner, like so many, was unaware of the requirements to get a building permit and get planning approval as part of that process as well. What occurred next shocked them; they received a housing complaint and an open violations case against their home. They would be fined monthly unless they demolished the structure or took corrective action to legalize it. The trouble was that the structure exceeded both the allowable height and footprint for detached accessory structures within the setback. To make matters more complicated, it also exceeded the allowable floor area ratio of the site and the proposal was in a scenic corridor which prohibited development within the setback. After some careful consideration, we decided on a path forward. First, we would need to address the FAR or floor area ratio standards. The allowable floor area on a site increases as density increases, so we determined that if there was an ADU on site, it would increase the FAR enough to allow the garage expansion. Luckily, the basement was legally finished and we simply converted the existing habitable space into an ADU. Once that permit was approved and the inspections finaled, we proceeded with the adjustment review process which requested exceptions to the setbacks and development in the scenic corridor setback. In concession, we decreased the height of the structure below 15’ to reduce the number of adjustments requested, which increases the likelihood of approval. We successfully argued our case to the planning department and the owner will get to keep their expansion.
Case 3: SW CALIFORNIA ADU/ GARAGE
We were connected to this client through the broker assisting in selling the property. Our client, Tim, had recently listed the property for sale, but discovered that there was no finaled permit for a detached ADU and garage. They simply assumed that the structure was legal because it matched the style and quality of the home in every way, but the reality was that the previous owner never legalized it. Buyers were using this as leverage to ask for a lower price, so the homeowner decided that it would be important to legalize. At a one hour site visit, we were able to point out nearly all of the deficiencies in the structure as it related to being a legal ADU. Through some additional planning research, we were able to identify that the structure would not meet planning standards for detached structures. The reason for this is that detached ADU’s need to be behind the front plane of the house OR set back 40’ from the front property line. In Portland, the front lot line is the shorter of the two lot lines on a corner lot. Unfortunately, this meant that the ADU was in the front yard and the front door technically faced the side yard. Through additional historic property research, however, we found that originally the lot was platted as a 100’x100’ lot and later was forced to give a 9.5’ dedication to the right-of-way. We used this understanding of the original siting of the house relative to the main street lot line to argue that the original ‘front’ should be considered the front, successfully allowing the structure to remain without adjustment.
In conclusion, planning violations can be inherited or created by homeowners, and depending on what is non-conforming, may or may not require adjustment reviews. Its best to hire a professional like Full Stop Design Studio to assess the violations or understand the potentials of your lot with respect to non-conforming development.