• Welcome to the new and improved Building Code Forum. We appreciate you being here and hope that you are getting the information that you need concerning all codes of the building trades. This is a free forum to the public due to the generosity of the Sawhorses, Corporate Supporters and Supporters who have upgraded their accounts. If you would like to have improved access to the forum please upgrade to Sawhorse by first logging in then clicking here: Upgrades

Change of plan - openings between townhouses

C

Code Neophyte

Silver Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2009
Messages
271
Location
Central Missouri
Only in our jurisdiction, I swear...

Permit issued for two, attached, single-family dwellings (not really 'townhouses' as in the thread title). Each unit is built on its own parcel, with a lot line in the center. Built as 'spec.s', now a prospective buyer comes along and says, "I'll take the right unit, and my mother-in-law will take the left unit - AND, we want to create doorways between the units on the main and lower levels."

So effectively, it now becomes either a two-family dwelling, OR a really screwed up single-family.

Aside from combining the parcels, what would you do to allow this to move forward (or WOULD you???) and to prevent the two spaces which have the appearance and design of either a two-family dwelling or two, single-family attached dwellings to be occupied differently or sold as such in the future?
 
I would call it an I-2 because anyone who wants a door to share their house with the mother in law is obviously insane.
 
Now if I can hijack my own thread with a more general question - or two, actually:

1. Can there be openings (protected, of course) between dwelling units in two-family buildings or townhouses? (I can't see where it is addressed specifically one way or the other).

2. Can a two-family dwelling be constructed across a lot line and even have separate ownership from one side to the other? I can't find a definition for two-family dwellings in the code, nor any reference to ownership.
 
Looks like time for a modification.

Allow protected openings with it functioning as a single dwelling unit, the modification being that the doors will be replaced with rated wall construction when/if they are transferred to separate ownership.

Combining the lots is likely not an option as would create a planning issue with two kitchens and problems when trying to separate later.
 
I would allow the openings between the two. After the parcels are joined and recorded at the courthouse

as one parcel, simply install cased openings on the levels desired and it now becomes an atypical one

family residence. No protected opening requirements.

Typically, only one structure is allowed on any one parcel, unless your AHJ has ordinances to allow

others. The IBC would classify these building as R-3. Check your Zoning regs.

What someone ' might ' do to this structure in the future will be up to the adopted codes, ...desired

changes, Zoning requirements, etc., etc.

FWIW, Coug Dad has the common sense and right occupancy group classification.

.
 
We still call them townhouses when we have 2 units with a property line running through them. We would either combine the lots together and remove one of the kitchens and all the smoke alarms where interconnected and call it a single family residence or under alternate means and methods allow a common opening between two dwelling units provided it was protected
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Where in the code does it say I can only have one kitchen?

Allow the openings, do not change the status of the lots with the county, ownership of lots must be under one entity and include note on permit that two separate dwellings can be re-established when openings are closed and properly rated. Done.
 
Had a SFR review once that had 7, count 'em seven, kitchens. Had a kitchen in the basement, three inside (one "show kitchen", one catering and another in the guest quarters), and one outside on the main and three upstairs, one in the master, one for the kids suite and one for the nanny. Too many for me but that is what they wanted.
 
Prior to issuing the permit for the wall penetrations I would require the owner to produce a copy of the deeds for each property. If the owner on each is identical I would issue the permit and note on the permit that the permit is creating a single family dwelling that crosses the property line. Individual dwelling units may be re-established once openings are closed and meet minimum separation requirements(2hr).
 
Let them have doors.

It is not a "townhouse" per the "townhouse" definition so it isn't really two single family dwellings but is a duplex (it meets the definition for duplex). Rate the doors to equal the required wall separation rating for duplexes. Duplex structures may have (but aren't required to have) different owners (as in condo units where the property line is between the units).

There is no code or zoning reason there cannot be doors between the units to be used at the owners prerogative that I am aware of.
 
I don't think we have a two-family in my jurisdiction, so bear with me if I am incorrect, but.. R317.1 Two-family dwellings allows 3/4hr doors between the units.

The definition of townhouse precludes 2 single family dwellings from being considered townhouses.

I do not see anything in the code that requires each part of a two-family home on it's own parcel, nor to I see anything requiring a two-family home to be on a single parcel.

I would tend to believe it must be a single parcel *but* that is just my gut instinct, I don't have anything to substantiate that.
 
I'd call it a single family and join the lots (or whatever is required in your jurisdiction)... if they split it later, the re-establish a (probably) one hour not two closure to the opening. As far as kitchens, many of my Jewish friends have 2 if they keep kosher.
 
TimNY said:
I don't think we have a two-family in my jurisdiction, so bear with me if I am incorrect, but.. R317.1 Two-family dwellings allows 3/4hr doors between the units.The definition of townhouse precludes 2 single family dwellings from being considered townhouses.

I do not see anything in the code that requires each part of a two-family home on it's own parcel, nor to I see anything requiring a two-family home to be on a single parcel.

I would tend to believe it must be a single parcel *but* that is just my gut instinct, I don't have anything to substantiate that.
Click to expand...
Doors -- probably but I didn't check your reference

Correct townhouse defined is three or more

Parcel ~ if it must be on a single parcel that would have to be per zoning. Nothing in the building code requires a single parcel. All condo units are on separate "parcels". Nor does the building code require two parcels.
 
I think the issue is that units are owned by different individuals, a man owns one and his mother owns the other. Different ownerships require the rated wall.

If the man owned both units, then there is no reason to require that his single family dwelling have a rated wall.
 
GHRoberts said:
I think the issue is that units are owned by different individuals, a man owns one and his mother owns the other. Different ownerships require the rated wall.If the man owned both units, then there is no reason to require that his single family dwelling have a rated wall.
Click to expand...
No, ownership never plays a part in the code.

It simply needs the 1 hr separation required by a duplex plus the 3/4hrs(?) doors
 
Does the code allow any openings / penetrations in the 1 hour separation wall????
 
Could do a modification under IBC 715 Opening Protectives and have two 1 hour doors one on each side similarly to what is seen between hotel suites. This way if neccessary at least one of the doors can be locked.
 
I'm with Yankee on this one until proven otherwise..

I don't think there are any requirements in the Residential Code to prohibit it. If you were in the Building Code you would run into fire walls/party walls.

Zoning may play a role.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top