2/5/1986 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

required to be installed along proposed lot lines prior to final plat approval. However, the applicant was informed that installation of firewalls may be required prior to occupancy of units. The County Attorney's Office approved this procedure. Table 600, Standard Building Code, is the reference regarding fire separation along property lines. It is to be used in .conjunction with Section 403, Standard Building Code, regarding tenant separation. Since subdivision of the center, the staff has determined that the code does not mandate zero setback construction requirements for condo- minium type construction for purposes of applying the code. In order to apply zero setback construction, the property line division must give each individual owner complete accessibility to and control of his property. The code does not differentiate between tenant occupancy vs. ownership in this type of construction, nor does the code consider unit ownership or rental situations to mandate zero setback construction requirements, i.e., firewall construction. One hour construction, as permitted in certain tenant separations and condominium apartment construction, is cost efficient and practical in buildings were tenants and/or owners have common access, maintenance responsibilities, etc. CONCLUSION: Subdivision of center without firewalls was consistent with County regulations, including building codes. The method by which the subject property was subdivided has no bearing on the original plan review. This project complies with the building code requirements for tenant separation. Party walls and firewalls are synonymous in function, the difference being in locations. Party walls are located equally on a separation line and are shared in ownership and/or responsibility of the common wall. A fire wall is an independent wall under the exclusive control of the enclosed space. These walls are not to be confused with tenant separation partitions which are defined as simply a wall or partition between tenants which may be non -fire rated. 4. The final question concerned the terminology used in present- ing the proposed subdivision to the Board of County Commis- sioners for approval. Mr. Berlin noted that the subdivision of the center was presented to the Board as a land condomini- um. However, he stated that the subdivision was not a condominium because it was not approved as a condominium under the condominium laws of the State of Florida. It is Mr. Berlin's contention that Old Dixie Center should have been presented as a party wall subdivision rather than a land condominium. He also implied that, because of the semantics, the Board of County Commissioners adopted a plat based upon inaccurate information presented by the staff. In the County's ordinance, there is no reference to party wall subdivision. The Subdivision and Platting ordinance, however, does specifically reference land. condominiums. As defined in the code, land condominiums are the result of applying the state's condominium laws to a subdivision of land. It was the opinion of the County Attorney's office that the intent of this provision of the ordinance is met upon creation of an association and creation of a decla- ration of covenants and restrictions which adequately provide for the project's common areas. In this as in all cases, the association documents were reviewed and approved by the County Attorney's office; execution of the final plat docu- ment by the County Attorney also indicates concurrence with all plat submittals. 31 BOOK FEB5 1986 .