Re: code challenge
By Paul: A "feeder that passes from one unit thru another (thru one dwelling to another) needs to comply with the words and intent of 230.3.
Not in a condo or other multiple occupancy building. It wouldn't be allowed at all.
In a newly constructed condo this would a trespass and could be made to be removed if it breaches the perimeter of the "owned" property which would be defined in the deed and ownership rules. And it wouldn't mater if it was encased in 10' of concrete or 20' under the unit. If the deed to the property shows that it is owned by the owner of the unit no feeders or any other utilities can breach these property lines if they supply another unit.
In most cases these property lines are drawn at each firewall. Where this gets sticky is when you have grade level units that have front and back yards with the property lines that run out from each firewall to a certain distance in front and back. It is in these cases that even the property under the unit is owned by the owner of the unit, and it is their property and if they are allowed to install a pool in their bylaws and there is a feeder ran across their property to feed someone else's unit it would be a trespass.
If they wanted to install a sunken hot tub in the living room and there is a feeder run across under the slab it would be a trespass. This would be just like if you had a regular house in a neighborhood and your neighbor had his service ran across your yard to get to his house you would have every right to have it removed unless there is a easement in the deed.
In large condos that are multi-floor multi-unit, there would be common property that would be own by a property owners association or a building management company that the property owner pay a monthly or yearly contract to maintain the building and grounds. in this case utilities would be ran in these locations and not breach the actual owned property lines.
If we look at 230.70(C) it clearly requires that "each occupant shall have access to the occupant?s service disconnecting means." This would be violated if the owner of a unit had to trespass upon the property of another unit to get to his disconnect. In a multi-floor multi-unit building there would be some kind of building management so that the exception to 230.70(C) would apply.
In strip malls many will have a defined area for parking in the front and for deliveries in the back that will be owned and maintained by the owner of that unit. (This was the case in the example I posted earlier) The same rules apply.
This even goes for trees. If unit "A" has a tree in their yard and it has branches that hang over into unit "B" yard, unit "B" can ask unit "A" to remove them. And if unit "A" refuses then unit "B" can have them removed and send the bill to unit "A"
Of course this all depends upon local or state property rights laws.
Oh by the way I would agree with what your saying if this was rental units and the property was under one ownership.
But that wasn't what the poster's question asked.
[ December 03, 2004, 02:16 AM: Message edited by: hurk27 ]