Knappett v. Locke

576 P.2d 1327, 19 Wash. App. 586, 1978 Wash. App. LEXIS 2139
CourtCourt of Appeals of Washington
DecidedMarch 27, 1978
Docket4862-1
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 576 P.2d 1327 (Knappett v. Locke) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Washington primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Knappett v. Locke, 576 P.2d 1327, 19 Wash. App. 586, 1978 Wash. App. LEXIS 2139 (Wash. Ct. App. 1978).

Opinion

Williams, J.

This action was brought by Donald C. Knappett and wife to enjoin Edward M. Locke, his wife, and Western Home Builders, Inc., from constructing a house of more than two stories, or more than 30 feet in height, upon their lot in the city of Lake Forest Park, in *588 violation of the ordinances of that city. A temporary injunction halting construction was issued at the instance of the Knappetts. In their answers to the complaint, the Lockes and Western Home Builders denied that the house as planned violated any ordinances of the city, and prayed for damages because of the delay caused by the temporary injunction. After trial, the court entered findings of fact, conclusions of law and judgment dismissing the complaint; after a further hearing, the court entered judgment for the Lockes on the counterclaim for damages. The Knappetts appeal both judgments.

In December 1975, the Lockes engaged Western Home Builders to construct a house for them upon a lot in Lake Forest Park. The "Application and Building Permit," No. 394, specified that the

Building will be approx. 51 x 41 and three stories high. Basement? Yes x No_.

When a building permit was issued by the City to Western Home Builders, this action was commenced and a temporary injunction, supported by a $1,000 bond, was issued. A new permit, No. 398, was then issued stating

Building will be irregular shape, approx. 51 x 41 and two (2) stories high. Basement? Yes x No_.

The parties entered into a settlement agreement, which led to the dissolution of the temporary injunction by stipulation. The cause of action for a permanent injunction and for damages on the counterclaim were then taken to trial.

Because the Knappetts have abandoned their claim that the house was to be more than 30 feet high, the main question is whether the house, as planned, has three stories, in violation of the city ordinances, or two stories and a basement, in compliance with the ordinances. The answer to this question depends upon the definition of "story," which, in turn, depends upon the definition of "grade."

In 1974, the Lake Forest Park City Council enacted ordinance No. 214,

*589 An ordinance regulating the erection, construction, enlargement, alteration, repair, abatement, demolition, conversion or moving, occupancy and use, height, area, and maintenance of buildings, structures, and land in the City of Lake Forest Park, Washington; providing for the issuance of permits and collection of fees therefor; providing for the adoption of standards of public safety in construction, including a building code, mechanical and fire codes and establishing fire zones; establishing standards of fire prevention, plumbing, waste disposal, electrical, mechanical, health and safety; and providing penalties for violation, and repealing ordinances Nos. 6, 13, 40, 142, and 175.

The ordinance declared that the adoption of certain national "standards," including the Uniform Building Code (U.B.C.), 1973 edition, was necessary to promote the public health, safety, and welfare, and that compliance with the standards was to be prima facie evidence of compliance with the ordinance.

The U.B.C. defines "story" thus:

Story is that portion of a building included between the upper surface of any floor and the upper surface of the floor next above, except that the topmost story shall be that portion of a building included between the upper surface of the topmost floor and the ceiling or roof above. If the finished floor level directly above a basement, cellar or unused under-floor space is more than 6 feet above grade as defined herein for more than 50 percent of the total perimeter or is more than 12 feet above grade as defined herein at any point, such basement, cellar or unused under-floor space shall be considered as a story.

(Italics ours.) And "grade" thus:

Grade (Adjacent Ground Elevation) is the lowest point of elevation of the finished surface of the ground, paving or sidewalk within the area between the building and the property line, or when the property line is more than 5 feet from the building, between the building and a line 5 feet from the building.

A previous city ordinance, No. 204, enacted in 1973, contained no definition of "story,” but did contain a definition of "grade":

*590 "Grade" shall mean the average of the finished ground level at the centers of all walls of a building.

First of all, the U.B.C. definition of "grade," and not the definition in ordinance No. 204, must apply. Ordinance No. 214, which is the more recent, states that the definitions in the standards listed therein, which include the U.B.C., shall apply. And because the U.B.C.'s definition of "story" specifically depends on the definition of "grade as defined herein", it would be unreasonable to use a definition of "grade" from a different source.

The Knappetts contend that "grade," under the U.B.C. definition, means the lowest point on the building lot within 5 feet of the building. Therefore, they say, if the finished floor level directly above a basement is more than 6 feet above that low point, the basement is a "story" for the purpose of the ordinance prohibiting 3-story houses. We disagree. That interpretation of "grade" would effectively eliminate the phrase "for more than 50 percent of the total perimeter" from the definition of "story"; for if the finished floor level directly above the basement is more than 6 feet above the "grade" (the lowest point to be found on the building lot within 5 feet of the building), then it is more than 6 feet above it for 100 percent of the perimeter. If the Knappetts are correct, the "12 feet above grade" phrase would also be meaningless.

To further appreciate the impracticability of the Knappetts' theory, one need only imagine a house which on three sides looks like an ordinary 2-story house with an underground basement, but which has a fourth side with a door to the basement and a flight of steps rising to the level of the ground surrounding the house. This house would have "3 stories" because there would be a point immediately outside the basement door, which would be the lowest point on the building lot within 5 feet of the building; that point, by the Knappetts' definition, would be the "grade" for all purposes.

There is a more realistic reading of "grade": each point along the outside of a building has its own "grade," which is *591 the lowest point of elevation, along a line running perpendicular to the side of the building, on the building lot within 5 feet of the building. Just as there is an infinite number of points on the outside of a building, so is there an infinite number of "grades," one for each point on the building. To determine whether a basement is a "story," one measures the distance between the finished floor level directly above the basement and the "grade" that corresponds to that particular point on the outside of. the building.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Jonathan Liffgens, Et Ux, V Luke Dorny
Court of Appeals of Washington, 2022
Fisher v. Parkview Properties, Inc.
859 P.2d 77 (Court of Appeals of Washington, 1993)
Wharf Restaurant, Inc. v. Port of Seattle
605 P.2d 334 (Court of Appeals of Washington, 1979)
Knappett v. Locke
600 P.2d 1257 (Washington Supreme Court, 1979)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
576 P.2d 1327, 19 Wash. App. 586, 1978 Wash. App. LEXIS 2139, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/knappett-v-locke-washctapp-1978.