# Zero Lot Line Wall unrated



## Dawgbark (Aug 29, 2011)

This example is on the Calif. Res. Code and their Chapter 7A from the State Fire Marshal

,

There is a development I heard of that has Zero clearance lot lines, that is going to allow the walls to not be rated, have windows in them and allow overhangs of 2 feet,

They are going to have a No Build Zone recorded on the deeds that goes out 5 feet. From the property line where they will not let anyone in the future build on. The building are sprinklered as mandated by a local ordnance and California code, It may even be in the Yellow of the map for enforcing CBC Chapter 7A which mandates special windows and materials be used on the exterior.  The size of lots average 120ft.X40ft with on the average of 16 ft. between the units the five feet being a part of the 16ft.

Would you allow this to be built inside your Jurisdiction?


----------



## mtlogcabin (Aug 29, 2011)

> They are going to have a No Build Zone recorded on the deeds that goes out 5 feet. From the property line where they will not let anyone in the future build on


Sounds like a setback or fire seperation distance to me


----------



## Dawgbark (Aug 30, 2011)

mtlogcabin said:
			
		

> Sounds like a setback or fire seperation distance to me


mtlogcabin,

Would you allow this to be built?  Would you allow the property line wall to be non rated with openings in it?

My question to the guy that told me about this is, is that a property line or not?

His come back was we have a clear space of over five feet.

My question back to him was, Is that a property line on that plot/plat line plan, or is the 5 ft line a property line ?


----------



## mtlogcabin (Aug 30, 2011)

If there is a recorded subdivision with lot lines then the normal way to provide no build easements are to measure them from the property lines. If there are no recorded lot lines (one big lot) then you assume the property line between structures. The no build easment you describe would require homes to have a minimum of 10 feet between them.

If the property line is the exterior wall of the home and the no build easment creates a 10 foot open space between homes then it is basically the same. The openings on the property line are no less safe than if the property line was 5 ft away. It may not meet the letter of the code but it would meet the intent.

My biggest concern would be who and how does the no build easment be enforced. We have some no build easements here from 15 to 20 years ago and as staff leaves they get forgot about. We do not require surveys or title searches so there is no way for us to know about them after time.

Since this is part of a new development and if the no build easements are on the plat and not buried in a covenat or deed restrictionn document it might be easier to manage


----------



## brudgers (Aug 30, 2011)

Depends on the code.

  This sort of traditional development pattern was allowed (sans windows) by IRC 2003.

  In typical, we don't understand why it is allowed fashion, the 2006 IRC was modified through the ICC's dysfunctional never met a code change we didn't like process which the NFPA rejected.


----------



## texasbo (Aug 30, 2011)

Dawgbark said:
			
		

> Would you allow this to be built inside your Jurisdiction?


We would and do, by amendment.

But even without amendment, as long as the easement is properly platted and described, it is the classic case for approval of alternate method.


----------



## Dawgbark (Aug 31, 2011)

Thanks for the replies; I had to go do some out of town work. Looking at the 2003 IRC I can not find where it would allow the window (sans), not sure what they are.  As far as allowing the windows by Alt. Methods I can see where they can, I guess they have gone and let this group start their project without the window or wall protection, by recording the setback/open space. I spoke with one of the City  planning staff about the windows not having a rating, Looks like a planner tells the Fire Department and the Building Department how the cow eats the cabbage now days .


----------



## TJacobs (Aug 31, 2011)

Jurisdictions can and will approve many non-code-compliant projects out of ignorance or political pressure.

There are also those that think alternate methods means do whatever you want.


----------



## RJJ (Sep 1, 2011)

Yes! and I have one that just set the house next to it on fire. (0) lot line buildings only 6' apart. Zoning allowed this 30 years ago. Building codes did not address it either until lately.


----------



## Pcinspector1 (Sep 1, 2011)

Not sure I understand,

"They are going to have a No Build Zone recorded on the deeds that goes out 5 feet. From the property line where they will not let anyone in the future build on.

This is called a set back, like the shed would have to be placed 5' from the property line. If theres a utility easement lets say 7.5' the shed would have to be even further from the property line.

So is this a property line between building's that are built on a zero lot line and you place a structure like a shed next to this line in the back yard, are you saying there would be a 5' no build zone there? Five feet from the zero lot line!

I'm a visual guy, a picture would help!

I have trouble with thought problems and riddles too!

pc1


----------



## texasbo (Sep 1, 2011)

Pc: you are visualizing it correctly as an easement, and it is shown on the plat just like the 7.5' easement you referenced. It is placed there to maintain building separation of 10'.

The fire doesn't know or care where the property line is. That's why the code allows things like "imaginary property lines" between two buildings on the same lot, provided there's adequate building separation. That's also why the building code doesn't require you to measure fire separation distance from a property line when it is adjacent to a public way. An easement, properly platted, recorded, and described, is an excellent candidate for alternate method to a public way.


----------



## alora (Sep 1, 2011)

Dawgbark said:
			
		

> This example is on the Calif. Res. Code and their Chapter 7A from the State Fire Marshal...
> 
> Would you allow this to be built inside your Jurisdiction?


Was able to do this on the 101 in Encinitas ...

... next to the ocean.


----------



## Frank (Sep 1, 2011)

As long as building restrictions maintain the 10 ft separation between buildings it can be done by modification.


----------



## peach (Sep 11, 2011)

If there is a required 5' set back, it's not zero lot line construction.


----------



## Yikes (Jan 20, 2012)

I am looking at a project where an outbuilding is right next to a major Edison utility right-of-way for high voltage transmission lines.  Nothing will ever be built under those lines.  I remember on the old ICC board, some people considered that because the utility was quasi-public, they would treat the no-build path of the transmission lines as effectively a public right-of-way for purposes of property line wall ratings.

What say you?


----------



## mtlogcabin (Jan 20, 2012)

Nope

It is a private easement of a private piece of property. RR ROW get abandoned all the time and occasionally power lines are relocated even tranmission lines.


----------

