New lot line through existing building

[Code Neophyte]

I have been presented with a scenario that I haven't seen before. A property owner is proposing to subdivide an existing II-B building into separate parcels. There are no existing walls along the newly-created lot line. Does the building code permit there to be no wall at a property line / lot line? Or would the existing building need to be altered to create party walls at all new lot lines?

 

[jdfruit]

A lot of legal implications with the Illinois "Plat Act"; County requirements for land subdivision, and possibly City requirements for land division. If the Owner wishes to "condo" the building then Plat Act and Condominium Act must be complied with. If the Owner is "proposing" only at this time, when he finds what is required for subdividing, the Owner may drop the idea. For example, there must be a clear condo definition for what a potential buyer will receive upon purchase, the definitions do not allow Ownership boundaries that are not walls when within a building unless the area is common or undivided use suitable for the situation such as automobile garage parking spaces.

As a Building Official; I would recommend telling the Owner that if he wants to divide Ownership by "plat"; then there must be walls per current code to divide the building at property line with all attendant building services separated into distinct systems.

Keep us informed on what happens with this Owner proposal.

 

[retire09]

The request for the lot split must be denied until the building is modified in such a way that approving the new property line will not create a building or zoning code violation. This will involve far more than just rated walls.

Each building must have it's own utility services, exiting, access, parking and restrooms. You must have two separate buildings, each in full compliance with current codes for the occupancy and use for both building codes and zoning codes in your jurisdiction.

 

[cda]

does he say why he wants to do it?

 

[steveray]

As retire says...that is super complicated and generally not worth the effort....Party walls needed and lots of other changes...

 

[fatboy]

Agree with other, fire wall, utility separation (including a new water/sewer tap, most utilities do not allow compound taps), a multitude of other issue that would pop up. Advise him against even wasting time and money on the concept.

 

[kilitact]

I have been presented with a scenario that I haven't seen before. A property owner is proposing to subdivide an existing II-B building into separate parcels. There are no existing walls along the newly-created lot line. Does the building code permit there to be no wall at a property line / lot line? Or would the existing building need to be altered to create party walls at all new lot lines?

Yes a party wall and possible alteration of the existing building will be needed. The building owner would need to evaluate the worth. One advantage is they would have two buildings to sell, could be worth it. I have personally done this to commercial building and found it paid off.

 

[Francis Vineyard]

This happens frequently enough to remind me of a movie; Cash McCall.

In the last 4 years we've had 4 buildings split with property lines. The easiest is the installation of a firewall or two exteriors that divide an open space such as in a warehouse. Adding another exterior wall to carry an existing floor and roof from an existing wall takes more resource.

One of my canned comments;

"Prior to the approval of this subdivision plat, a building permit application will need to be submitted and approved documenting that the buildings have a fire wall in compliance with USBC section 705 and 706 as two buildings. The application shall include architectural drawings.

Note; a certificate of occupancy cannot be issued until the buildings on separate lots has its own electrical service and is incompliance with the USBC and any pertinent laws or ordinances."

 

[Yikes]

A possible alternative, without putting in dividing walls, would be to allow unlimited mutual access easements across all parcels. However, if they are doing that, I don't know that there are any advantages to doing a subdivision.

Perhaps some type of legal co-op agreement would serve the owners better than a subdivision.

 

[Mark K]

Each of the buildings separated by the property line would need to satisfy all code provisions as stand alone buildings. This includes the structural system including the ability to resist wind and earthquake forces.

 

[Yikes]

Wow, if you think that's a problem, what do you do when the state line runs right through the middle of your bar?

http://www.gypsynester.com/two-states.htm

 

[fatboy]

Now that's funny!