[Vision2020] Thank you P & Z

[Kit Craine]

In this instance, “permission” applies to two areas of law. One is land 
use (i.e. comprehensive plan and zoning) which is signified by a ZONING 
certificate (this means the USE is in compliance with the ZONING code). 
The other is structural (i.e. building codes) which is signified by an 
OCCUPANCY certificate (i.e. the STRUCTURE is in compliance with the 
BUILDING code.) Theoretically, the City should issue a ZONING 
certificate before it issues any building permits and an OCCUPANCY 
certificate after the remodelling/construction is completed. Although 
only one certificate may be sought (e.g. a buildings use changes but it 
is not remodelled or it is remodelled but the use doesn’t change) BOTH 
certificates are required by the code BEFORE a building can be used.

The problem with NSA is that the zoning certificate (if one has been 
issued) is invalid because the USE is not in compliance with the code.

Uses and structures which are “grandfathered” were—at one point in 
time—in compliance with the code. Subsequently, the code was changed so 
the use, structure, or placement of the structure is no longer in 
compliance. According to the code, the use and/or structure is allowed 
to remain unchanged (i.e. not expanded) until it comes down (e.g. burns 
down, falls down, is torn down) or is abandoned for a specified length 
of time.

NSA does not, and never did, have a valid ZONING permit, as determined 
by the Board of Appeals AND the City Council. As a result, it cannot be 
“grandfathered” and the City has a legal obligation under the code to 
command that it cease operations at its current site.

Moving NSA, as with other uses in the same situation, would be 
expensive for the owner of the use. However, it is NOT the City’s 
problem. State code explicitly exempts cities and city employees from 
liability related to the granting/denying of permits. Perhaps there 
needs to be a penalty to the city for bad permitting decisions, but 
that’s not a local question; one must take that issue to our state 
representatives.

The primary reason why the City cannot ignore the NSA use is that it 
sets a precedent which will make it impossible for the City to enforce 
the code against anyone. To put that into perspective, imagine that 
someone establishes a bar, gambling parlor, and brothel next to your 
house after getting the proper building permits (perhaps claiming a 
different use) and an occupancy permit. They create all sorts of 
problems, but you have no recourse because the city previously decided 
that it will “grandfather” existing uses—legal or not—because a 
scofflaw’s investment is more important than the neighbor’s legal 
rights under the zoning code.

Kit Craine

On Sep 23, 2005, at 8:57 AM, Pat Kraut wrote:

> By 'Leadership' do you mean people who would do what you want and 
> ignore others?? Seems to me they are leading...just not doing it 
> exactly like you want them to.
>  I do have a question. If NSA has permission to be in the old GTE 
> building, they have remodeled it, been in it for some time and now 
> comes a question from some about the legality of that. But, wouldn't 
> this or any soon to be council have to 'grandfather' in NSA. After all 
> this time and money spent on the building or any other school building 
> shouldn't they just let them all stay and start from here to change 
> it?
> ----- Original Message -----
>  From: DonaldH675 at aol.com
> To: vision2020 at moscow.com
> Sent: Friday, September 23, 2005 8:27 AM
> Subject: [Vision2020] Thank you P & Z
>
>
> Visionaries:
>  
> I would like to join Joan in complimenting our P & Z committee 
> members.  What a thankless (literally) job for the volunteers who took 
> their task seriously and did their level best to observe city code 
> while trying to solve a difficult zoning issue.  My question to them 
> is this:  Why do you bother?  You gave up countless hours of your 
> time, you actually gave some thought to the issues and ultimately 
> hammered out a plan that provided a reasonable solution.  Did I agree 
> with all of it?  No, I surely didn't.  But I watched you work all 
> summer and there is no doubt in my mind that it was a sincere and 
> productive effort. 
>   
> I also watched last Monday night as your efforts were brushed 
> aside.  I was appalled when Mayor Comstock, ignoring your 
> recommendations, asked that Joel Plaskon's suggestions be placed on 
> the overhead screen where they remained for the rest of the evening as 
> the focus of the council discussion.  What a load of hooey.  Joel 
> Plaskon didn't get it right the first time, and yet the mayor and 
> council decided to rely on his suggestions in lieu of yours.  
>  
> We should all be grateful that elections are approaching.  Sadly, not 
> all those lazy ninnies warming a seat - at tax payers expense - are up 
> for re-election.  However, it is my fervent wish that a new 
> council will provide the leadership that is so badly needed in this 
> community.
>  
> Rose Huskey     
>  Who speaks for the chickens, people?  Who?
>
>
> _____________________________________________________
>  List services made available by First Step Internet,
>   serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.  
>                 http://www.fsr.net                      
>            mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
> _____________________________________________________
>  List services made available by First Step Internet,
>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>                http://www.fsr.net
>           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯