DTBarch
SAWHORSE
Rather unique situation here. Client owns 30 year old retail shopping center. Total site has two separate parcels. The shops building crosses the property line with one tenant space having a property line bisecting the tenant suite. Same owner for both parcels.
Owner is attempting to lease the space in question which has been vacant for some time. Plan review came back with direction to either erect a fire separation wall at the property line, or complete a lot combination to eliminate the condition.
From a building code standpoint, are there any exceptions anyone is aware of out there to deal with this non-conforming existing condition creatively. Clearly, not an imminent life safety condition since the shopping center as a whole lies equally on both sides of this lot line with same occupancy type, building and ownership on both sides.
IBC Table 602, 705 and 706 all are related, but talk more specifically about walls on top of property line, or separation from property line. Client's attorney has had success crafting a legal document that prohibits the lots being separated in the future, but that doesn't address building code non-conformance. Any thoughts?
Owner is attempting to lease the space in question which has been vacant for some time. Plan review came back with direction to either erect a fire separation wall at the property line, or complete a lot combination to eliminate the condition.
From a building code standpoint, are there any exceptions anyone is aware of out there to deal with this non-conforming existing condition creatively. Clearly, not an imminent life safety condition since the shopping center as a whole lies equally on both sides of this lot line with same occupancy type, building and ownership on both sides.
IBC Table 602, 705 and 706 all are related, but talk more specifically about walls on top of property line, or separation from property line. Client's attorney has had success crafting a legal document that prohibits the lots being separated in the future, but that doesn't address building code non-conformance. Any thoughts?