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.

Code Section: 188

Subject: Intensification of noncomplying structure

Effective Date: 11/94

Interpretation:

   This Section allows the intensification of a non-complying structure provided there is no increase in any discrepancy between existing conditions and Code standards. A shed built with permit in the required rear yard before the rear yard requirement went into effect, could not be converted to a garage without a variance as such conversion, with the constituent Building Code upgrading, driveways, noise, occasional parking on driveways and other auto-related activities, would constitute an increase in discrepancy from the rear yard standards.

Code Section: 188

Subject: Noncomplying carport

Effective Date: 12/00

Interpretation:

   The following Interpretation is hereby revoked:

"Noncomplying carport, demolition 6/90. This section prohibits changing a noncomplying structure in such a way as to create a new discrepancy or exacerbate an existing one. There was a proposal to demolish a carport located in the required rear yard while continuing to park a car there. It was noted that removing the carport would eliminate one rear yard obstruction and that leaving the automobile exposed exacerbated its presence in the rear yard. Since one consideration canceled out the other, the "tie" went to the owner who was allowed to demolish the carport. In such situations, we will encourage screening by landscaping. This determination could be overturned by the application of the Residential Design Guidelines which could result in replacing the garage or requiring the parking to be located in the buildable area of the lot."

   This Interpretation should not be used as a precedent. In the cases where there is an increase in nonconformity on one issue and a decrease on another issue, these cases will be reviewed on a case by case basis by Zoning Administrator to determine if they are permissible.

Code Section: 188

Subject: Deck on non-complying structure

Effective Date: 2/08

Interpretation:

   Under previous interpretations of Planning Code Section 188, a deck is permitted to be constructed upon the flat roof surface of a non-complying structure provided its open railing is no higher and no more enclosed than required by the Building Code. Previous interpretations of Section 311 exempt the addition of such decks from the notification requirements. Non-complying structures are, by definition, located within portions of lots that would normally not be developable and, decks are generally constructed to provide space for outdoor activities, some of which may have associated impacts, such as noise, on neighboring properties. Therefore, the addition of a deck or its access on any non-complying portion of the roof of a structure requires that a "ten day" letter, similar to that provided for a Block Book Notation, be sent to owners/occupants of all properties which border the subject property, to allow them an opportunity to voice any concerns.