Can an unlimited area building straddle a property line?

[Simonsays]

I need an opinion. I am reviewing a 100,000 SF one-story fully-sprinklered M-use building with 60’ clearance all around, but the building is split down the middle with a property line. Does anyone feel this could qualify as an unlimited area building? Applicable code is the 2006 IBC.

 

[Coug Dad]

You will find great disagreement on this board on the subject of any building crossing a property line. There are past topics you can search to read the different opinions. I do not see a problem if the recorded titles for the properties are modified to require that the 60 foot clear space be maintained and that the two properties work together to the benefit of the fire protection and life safety for the single building.

 

[mtlogcabin]

No. remove the property line or we bind the 2 lots together with a recorded document that prohibits the sale of just one of the lots

 

[mark handler]

http://www.inspectpa.com/phpbb/showthread.php?2501-Property&highlight=parcels

 

[Frank]

We have approved this several times on a modification basis for strip shopping centers where the anchor store is owned by tenant and balance by developer. Not much different than the cross easements for driveways parking etc. on the same site. The covered mall section gives a similar philosophy allowing unlimited area without requiring anchors owned by developer.

Key is that the entire complex is under same management and control similar to a condominium situation. The fire cannot tell the difference between a lease line or a property line.

And typically there is a firewall at the property line for insurance purposes.

 

[Alias]

No. remove the property line or we bind the 2 lots together with a recorded document that prohibits the sale of just one of the lots

Agree with mtlogcabin. Before any building be allowed in my AHJ, a lot merge is required and then you can build.

Sue, in sunny chilly CA

 

[TimNY]

Agree with mtl and Alias. Never had the scenario here, but 2 lots = 2 buildings. Would require fire wall down the pl, and then they don't have the 60'

Merge the lots, no problem. I guess there is no zoning setback?

 

[BayPointArchitect]

Ditto.

I'm faced with this problem every so often.

 

[Architect1281]

ABSOLUTLY NOT

an unlimited area building requires

507.....and is surrounded and adjoined by public ways or yards not less than 60 feet (18 288

mm) in width.

YARD. An open space, other than a court, unobstructed from

the ground to the sky, except where specifically provided by

this code, on the lot on which a building is situated

PUBLICWAY. A street, alley or other parcel of land open to

the outside air leading to a street, that has been deeded, dedicated

or otherwise permanently appropriated to the public for

public use and which has a clear width and height of not less

than 10 feet (3048 mm). (EXCEPT WHEN 507 SAYS IT HAS TO BE 60 FEET)

Unlimited structures by way of 507 and not of construction type 1A 1B or 2A

are exception to the rules for size, area, and construction type based on the fact that they are

ACCESSIBLE around the entire perimeter. The yards and public ways are defined in the code

If they don't meet the definition and setbacks they are not compliant.