Code Section: 188

Subject: Reconstruction of garage representing a parking deficit

Effective Date: 8/87

Interpretation:

   See Interpretation 181(d) Reconstruction of nonconforming uses

Code Section: 188

Subject: Noncomplying structure, no permit evidence

Effective Date: 

Interpretation:

   This Section prohibits the expansion of a legally noncomplying structure but allows such legal structure to be maintained and repaired. A shed was non-complying because it existed in a required rear yard. The owner wanted to know if a permit to reroof the shed could be approved. There is no permit history for the shed. It does not show up on any of the historical land use or Sanborn maps. Because reroofing is critical to the integrity of a structure (which may be proven to be legal) reroofing permits to simply replace the roof surface will be granted in these circumstances. However, a permit to replace the roof structure if voluntarily removed, could not be granted until the structure was determined to be legal.

Code Section: 188

Subject: Alteration of noncomplying feature

Effective Date: 7/85

Interpretation:

   This Section says that noncomplying structures may be enlarged, altered, relocated or intensified provided there is no increase in discrepancy but prohibits their complete replacement except in conformity with the Code. Nevertheless, because of the life safety importance of such features, noncomplying stairs which are required egress under the Building Code may be completely removed and replaced within the same footprint if there is no increase in discrepancy between the feature and the Code requirement. The replacement structure, while remaining in the same general footprint area, can increase the footprint to the degree necessary to conform to current Code requirements. A fire wall required by Code would be considered an increase in discrepancy if the original stairs had none unless the fire wall is the minimum required by Code and would abut without extending above or beyond, a blank neighboring wall or fence.

Code Section: 188

Subject: Deck on noncomplying structure

Effective Date: 3/2001 (Original 12/85)

Interpretation:

   A deck is permitted on the roof surface of a noncomplying structure provided its open railing is no higher and no more enclosed than required by the Building Code. A solid fire or other wall, even if required by the Building or other Code, is not permitted as part of a deck on a noncomplying structure and would be considered an expansion contrary to the Planning Code.

Code Section: 188

Subject: Alteration of noncomplying building

Effective Date: 12/85

Interpretation:

   This Section says that noncomplying structures may be enlarged, altered, relocated or intensified provided there is no increase in discrepancy. An apartment building is both nonconforming due to density and noncomplying for various reasons among them being rear yard encroachment and deficiency of usable open space. It had window "light well" indentations from the side property lines. Balconies were allowed to be built within those indentations located within the area that would be required to be the rear yard under today's Code because they would make the development more closely comply with, the usable open space provisions. An internal light well at a level even with the lowest occupied floor was also permitted as "outdoor" usable area because it would also partially meet the usable open space requirements. Filling in a higher level of the light well was not allowed, nor was the expansion of the indoor living area of any level into the interior light well nor the roofing over of the top of the internal light well with a glass skylight.

Code Section: 188

Subject: Alteration of noncomplying building

Effective Date: 1/86

Interpretation:

   This Section says that noncomplying structures may be enlarged, altered, relocated or intensified provided there is no increase in discrepancy. Decking may be placed upon the flat roof of a noncomplying structure provided it is placed virtually flat against thereof and below any parapet. A railing may surround this deck provided it does not exceed the minimum height required by the Building Code for deck railings. This rule applies to both height and "footprint" noncompliance. The addition of a penthouse would not be a permitted obstruction so this deck would only be allowed without a variance if sufficient access to it were already present or available in the buildable area of the lot.

Code Section: 188

Subject: Alteration of noncomplying deck

Effective Date: 1/87

Interpretation:

   This Section says that noncomplying structures may be enlarged, altered, relocated or intensified provided there is no increase in discrepancy. A deck was noncomplying because it existed in the required rear yard in excess of the provisions of Section 136. The existing property line open railing of such deck could not be made into a solid, "one-hour" wall even though to do so would be to make it more complying with the Building Code.