Hi Peter,
interesting problem, I like how you worded it, like a prompt in an essay-type of exam.
In my opinion what you describe is shy of entering the realm of takings, eminent domain and possibly also title insurance.
I would start by looking at the history of the lot, the structures original setbacks, and the fire requirements at the time, as well as how they may have been changed over the years.
in second term, I would look for easements, and other setback restrictions imposed to now adjacent properties with respect to the historic structure.
then determine how all these decisions came about, which parties made or allowed such decisions and how they now affect the historic property, it's use and its conformity.
usually, the following parameters apply:
- Non-Conforming structures are created by enactment of new zoning ordinances. or changes thereof. the consequences of such enactments are borne by the municipality and can be considered takings if they negatively affect the value or usability of a property.
- Property Owners must comply with zoning regulations. Owners may apply for a variance. Said variance cannot affect adjacent property. if there is an existing non-conformity, it cannot be made bigger or worse through a variance process. the variance must be the minimum necessary.
- the partial sale of land to adjacent owners cannot create non-conformities, nor make them worse. If the lot is now a zero-lot, there should have been a process during this sale, which dealt with correcting the resulting non-conformities before the sale could take place. Here is where title insurance starts to become relevant, as the title company should be the one looking at this sort of issues.
It sounds as if your client does not care much about compliance, and did not care enough about it when selling parts of the lot. And he/she may she you as an obstacle.
I would request clarification on these issues from the client, and offer a separate proposal for a feasibility study, which may result in the need to apply for variances, demolish parts of the structure, retrofits or a number of other things. You may need to work with a zoning/real estate lawyer as well, and do extensive research with fire marshal, property appraiser, municipal government, on top of the historic authorities and neighbors.
As Architects, we are expected to learn and know about all of this, besides our specific craft. Sadly, we seldom get any recognition.
Good Luck!
------------------------------
Ivan Contreras, LEED AP, AIA
Qualifier | Director
CONTRERAS MUNOZ & CO
Miami FL
------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 02-25-2021 05:17 PM
From: Peter Carlsen
Subject: Can or should this building be saved
We have been asked to help with an early 20th century brick building. It is a small structure with 2 stories of residential above 1 floor of commercial store fronts. Over time it has become so out whack with modern codes that one wonders if it can or should be saved.
With multiple sale of the property and land the building has come to have zero lot line clearances on all sides. Of course there are windows and opening on all sides. The stair leading from the street rises over 13 feet in a steep single flight to the second floor not in a rated enclosure. There's a quasi second exit across a narrow wood exit balcony at the rear. In short nothing works . It is about to be surrounded on two sides with a new 5 story apartment building and it is in a historic district.
The Owner wants to dress it up and keep people renting. Parts can be made safer but the lot lines aren't going to shift?
What are the responsibilities of the various parties: the Fire Marshal, Building Official, Architect, Government responsibility toward the public and each other with such a structure.
------------------------------
Peter Carlsen AIA
Carlsen & Frank Architects
Saint Paul MN
------------------------------