2006-1 Noncorming Alterations►/ 1L I _►_ ._ \ 1
Date:
To:
Via:
From:
Subject:
Date Issued/Posted:
Effective Date:
ISSUE OUTLINE,:
April 14, 2006
Interpretations File No. 2006-1
Rob Chave, Planning Manager
Gina Coccia, Planner (0 i
INTERPRETATION REGARDING NONCONFORMING BUILDING
ALTERATIONS (SPECIFICALLY, ENCLOSING A CARPORT).
APRIL 14, 2006
APRIL 28, 2006 (unless appealed in a timely manner)
Planning staff is currently reviewing a building permit application (607 Daley Street — located in the RM-
1.5 'Lone) that entails converting an existing carport into a garage. The minimum side (east) setback for
the property is 10 feet. The submitted site plan (Page 4) shows the existing carport located
approximately 7 feet from this property line (a setback adjustment was approved under file number A-30-
1983 to allow the carport to be constructed as close as 6.5 feet from this property line). During planning
staff's review of the building permit application, the applicant was told that enclosing the carport was
considered increasing the nonconformity of the building, even though the setback would remain the same
after the walls were finished, and that pursuant to Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC)
Chapter 17.40.020.13, a nonconforming building may not be altered or changed in any manner which
increases the degree of nonconformity of the building. The City has considered the issue of enclosing a
nonconforming carport a number of times in the past. In each case, the City has considered that changing
a nonconforming carport from a primarily open structure into a fully enclosed structure (e.g. a garage) to
be an expansion of a nonconforming building that is not allowed unless a variance is otherwise approved.
This interpretation has been consistently applied, even when enclosing the building will not result in any
further encroachment into the setbacks.
The applicant has requested an interpretation regarding the issue where a nonconforming carport is
converted into a garage and results in the same setbacks: is that really expanding a nonconforming
structure?
After examining this case, staff is considering reversing this long standing position to allow
nonconforming carports to be converted into garages, provided that the nonconforming aspect is not
expanded (e.g. reducing the existing nonconforming setback or adding new area into the nonconforming
setback).
2006- I_nonconformingbuildingalterations. doc Page I of
RELEVANT CODE, SECTIONS:
ECDC 21.10.040 Building.
Building means any structure having a roof, excluding all forms of vehicles even though immobilized.
(See also, Accessory Building and Completely Enclosed Building.)
ECDC 21.15.080 Completely enclosed building.
Completely enclosed building means one designed and constructed with all exterior walls of the
structure solid from the ground to the roof line, and containing no openings except for windows and
doors which are designed to be closed.
ECDC 21.90.020 Setback.
Setback means the minimum distance that buildings/structures or uses must be set back from a lot line,
excluding up to 30 inches of eaves. (See also, Rear Setback, Side Setback, and Street Setback.)
ECDC 17.40.020 Nonconforming buildings.
A. Definition. A nonconforming building is one which once met bulk zoning standards and the site
development standards applicable to its construction, but which no longer conforms to such standards
due to the enactment or amendment of the zoning ordinance of the city of Edmonds or the application of
such ordinance in the case of a structure annexed to the city.
B. Continuation. A nonconforming building may be maintained and continued, unless required to be
abated elsewhere in this chapter or section, but it may not be changed or altered in any manner which
increases the degree of nonconformity of the building.
HISTORY:
The carport was constructed in 1983 (building permit number 1983-0625) and a setback adjustment (file
number A-30-1983) was approved in order to allow the carport to be built as close as 6.5 feet from the
side property line instead of the required 10 feet. The carport was legally constructed, but it is a
nonconforming structure and subject to the nonconforming provisions of the city's zoning code (ECDC
17.40.020).
The existing building is an unenclosed carport that is located approximately 7 feet from the side property
line. It has a storage closet at the "head end" of the carport that supports that end of the building. From
that point on, the roof extends to the north approximately 20 feet and is supported only by posts. It is
completely open and provides little to no obstruction to light, air or sight. The current proposal is to
completely enclose the building and turn it into a two car garage.
The City has considered the issue of enclosing a nonconforming carport a number of times in the past. In
each case, the City has considered that changing a nonconforming carport from a primarily open structure
into a fully enclosed structure (e.g. a garage) to be an expansion of a nonconforming building that is not
allowed unless a variance is otherwise approved. See V-02-159 and V-05-59 for carports where
variances were approved to allow them to be enclosed.
ANALYSIS:
The RM-1.5 zone requires a side setback of 10 feet and the existing carport, located approximately 7 feet
from the property line, is a nonconforming building in relation to the required setbacks. ECDC
17.40.020.13 allows for the continuation of a nonconforming building. however, it states "...it may not
be changed or altered in any manner which increases the degree of nonconformity of the building."
2006-1_nonconformingbuildingalterations.doc Page 2 of
It could be argued that enclosing a carport (which is typically an open structure that allows light and air
to pass through the structure at all times) with walls is significantly changing the degree of
nonconformity by increasing the "bulk" of the structure that is located within the setback. However, the
code is specific in stating that:
A nonconforming building may be maintained and continued, unless required to
be abated elsewhere in this chapter or section, but it may not be changed or
altered in any manner which increases the degree of nonconformity of the
building.. [ECDC 17.40.020.B]
The bulk requirements of the zone address setbacks, height, and other dimensional standards. The
standards do not address walls or openings as part of a structure. Enclosing a carport in such as manner
that does not alter the overall footprint of the structure does not result in a change in setbacks or in the
degree to which the structure encroaches into the setbacks. For this reason, this type of action (enclosing
a carport) is consistent with the city's nonconforming rules, and should be allowed.
THEREFORE, THE FOLLOWING INTERPRETATION IS HEREBY ISSUED:
IN GENERAL, ALTERATIONS OF NONCONFORMING BUILDINGS ARE ALLOWED SO
LONG AS THERE IS NO INCREASE IN THE DEGREE OF NONCONFORMITY OF THE
BUILDING. ENCLOSING AN EXISTING NONCONFORMING CARPORT BY TURNING IT
INTO A GARAGE (E.G. ADDING WALLS SO THAT THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT WITHIN
THE SETBACKS IS NOT CHANGED) IS A LEGAL ACTIVITY THAT COMPLIES WITH THE
CITY'S NONCONFORMING RULES.
APPEAL PROCEDURES:
Pursuant to Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Sections 20.105.010 and 20.105.020, staff
interpretations of the text of the ECDC are appealable decisions.
Should anyone wish to appeal this interpretation, a written appeal, accompanied by the required appeal
fee (see Planning Division fee handout) must be submitted within 14 calendar days of the date of
issuance/posting of this interpretation (please see below).
Issuance/Posting Date: APRIL 14, 2006
The deadline for filing an appeal of this interpretation is: APRIL 28, 2006
A written appeal must contain the following:
1) A reference to the decision being appealed.
2) The name and address of the person appealing, and his or her interest in the matter.
3) The reasons why the person appealing believes the interpretation to be inappropriate.
Posted: 1) Edmonds City Hall, 2"d Floor —Development Services Department
2) Edmonds Library
3) Edmonds Post Office
CC: Duane Bowman, Development Services Director
2006-1_nonconformingbuildingalterations.doc Page 3 of
SITE PLAN — Submitted with the applicant's building permit application, it depicts the existing carport
set back approximately 7 feet from the east side property line, which appears to be inline with the
existing duplex. The minimum required setback from the east side property line is 10 feet.
ALLEY
IXIfii. A6%IALT
9
p
I
I
n�cea
uxlrw exlp�p�
i
I D D
Y
M a z
EM°L C�MU_K _1
1 JJ �ii �j'j
rE�r
i—i
m
cAro cni
M N
I on6*.a•xc•vwT Z
pO
aT1B1owwc
y
i
i
i
tee-
i
o rx rnea
i�
EXI5TING
'po
DUPLEX
ffi. $ a a y
�,
Q
°
r.q•
-------------------------
�
- i
exl6T. svmiwus
i f
I
I
RErEIVED
FEB 15 7006
BUILDING DEPT,
19T
GRP[d tqP EM T. CVI�
I
DALEY STREET
NORn+
--
• SITE PLAN
-
e..,�.
CITY COPY
2006-1_nonconformingbuildingalterations.doc Page 4 of