Multi-family house question

[FrancisDoody]

During a continuing education class so time ago the discussion was about a separate meter for the common areas of a multi-family house. I am wondering weather a two family house would be considered as needing a separate meter for common area lighting. This is a service revamp on a house that was built in the early 1900's with no provisions for independent light at the present time.

Thanks,
Fran

 

[infinity]

Re: Multi-family house question

I think that you would have some leeway on a service upgrade of a house built 80-90 years ago. This would require a call to the AHJ.

 

[cselectric]

Re: Multi-family house question

I don't believe I've ever seen a duplex with a common or "house" panel. Then again, with a duplex you normally have seperate entrances, seperate garages (if any), seperate heating and cooling and often seperated basements, in effect you have no common areas. You also have no requirements for exit signage, egress lighting etc. So, no common systems that need to be powered.

On the other hand, if this building has common (landlord paid) heating and cooling and perhaps a common laundry area, basement, etc. Then a house panel might well be appropriate, though I don't believe required.

 

[jimwalker]

Re: Multi-family house question

Lots of ways to solve this.1st one is a poco light on a pole.2nd land lord keeps meter turned on even if vacant.Both units put up a light that is on photo cell.Anyway you can keep common area lit is fine.I have installed a few housepanels but mostly they were needed for things like sprinkler pumps.

 

[iwire]

Re: Multi-family house question

Originally posted by jimwalker:
2nd land lord keeps meter turned on even if vacant.

Take a look at 210.25.

 

[George Stolz]

Re: Multi-family house question

I don't believe Jim has an explicit violation of 210.25, Bob.

It's difficult to imagine a duplex needing common area lighting. Are the units front doors facing each other, where ambient light from the street cannot reach?

In general, for "friendly neighborhood design" reasons, it is not uncommon to install exterior lights outside a unit on a photoeye, with no switch aside from the circuit breaker for the tenant/HO to turn it off by. It eliminates the need for a house panel, an HOA to pay the bill, etc.

In one case, the switchlegs were actually run to the roof of a three-story multifamily dwelling to a contactor controlled by one photoeye. That way, when the one photoeye went bad, it would be replaced, as opposed to 300+ photoeyes going out all at once in a few years.

It's for not a common area--it's illuminating the tenant's property, their door or their driveway. But the tenant can't readily shut it off.

So the whole project looks warm and fuzzy, until the scumbag neighbors move in.

 

[iwire]

Re: Multi-family house question

Originally posted by georgestolz:
I don't believe Jim has an explicit violation of 210.25, Bob.

It's difficult to imagine a duplex needing common area lighting. Are the units front doors facing each other, where ambient light from the street cannot reach?

It may be difficult to imagine but if it needs common area lighting a house panel may be needed.

The way I see it around here is this.

If the tenant can control it, they can pay for it. If the individual tenant can not control it a house panel is needed.

Different areas handle things differently.

I have seen stairways in three family walk ups that had a fixture for each unit on each landing, each tenant could control their light.

 

[jimwalker]

Re: Multi-family house question

The one i dealt with was a front and back apartment and was 20 years ago.How about this,a 3way switch so both could control it.Ones rent reduced by $5 a month

 

[iwire]

Re: Multi-family house question

Originally posted by georgestolz:
I don't believe Jim has an explicit violation of 210.25, Bob.

Do you number 2 of this?

Originally posted by jimwalker:
Lots of ways to solve this.1st one is a poco light on a pole.2nd land lord keeps meter turned on even if vacant.Both units put up a light that is on photo cell.Anyway you can keep common area lit is fine.

I see it as a direct violation of 210.25

You can not light common areas from one tenants meter.

 

[George Stolz]

Re: Multi-family house question

I guess we'd just have to see the plans.

If the light illuminates the tenant's property and not his neighbor's, there is nothing that says it can't be photo-controlled and powered by that tenant's panel.

We can argue it blind all evening, but in the end, we'd have to see the plans to be more convincing either way.

That'll teach me to throw out a f'rinstance.

It's just not concrete, was all I was attempting to convey.

 

[iwire]

Re: Multi-family house question

Originally posted by georgestolz:
I guess we'd just have to see the plans.

If the light illuminates the tenant's property and not his neighbor's, there is nothing that says it can't be photo-controlled and powered by that tenant's panel.

I agree.

A lot would depend on the circumstances.

 

[physis]

Re: Multi-family house question

I think it comes down to this piece of 210.25.

branch circuits required for the purpose of .............. needs for public or common areas

As far as lighting, unless there are common garage areas, the only outdoor lighting requirements are specifically associated with an individual dwelling. 210.70(A)(2)(b). House panel optional.

 

[jimwalker]

Re: Multi-family house question

I rewired one property few years ago.Set up was garage/storage area down stairs with a common washer and dryer apartment above,landlord rented it with electric included and panel was outside.Other building 10 feet away with up stairs unit on its own meter paid by tenant.Down stairs unit has own meter and runs a common yard light.His son lived in it.And sure the son got a price break.Would that be legal setup ? Both building under one ownership and all panels open to public.

[ August 20, 2005, 07:23 PM: Message edited by: jimwalker ]

 

[George Stolz]

Re: Multi-family house question

Originally posted by jimwalker:
Both building under one ownership and all panels open to public.

Picture a 3-story 24-plex with breezeways, with lighting down those breezeways. There would be one owner, and the house panel is generally a 3R right next to the service.

To attempt some kind of lighting without the house panel would be virtually impossible, without some tenants lighting up an area that his neighbor would need lit to see to get to his door. That's a violation of 210.25.

When the building gets as small as a duplex, it gets easier to get by without a house panel without violating code.

The idea of there being "one owner" and an "accessible" panel doesn't really mean much. Just because the panel is outside doesn't mean that tenant A should pay for tenant B's ambient lighting.

Edit to add: And the NEC and the electrons don't know about sons and "breaks on the rent."

[ August 21, 2005, 08:55 AM: Message edited by: georgestolz ]

 

[iwire]

Re: Multi-family house question

Originally posted by georgestolz:
The idea of there being "one owner" and an "accessible" panel doesn't really mean much. Just because the panel is outside doesn't mean that tenant A should pay for tenant B's ambient lighting.

And in many cases would be illegal anyway. [/b][/quote]Darn right.

 

[jimwalker]

Re: Multi-family house question

Things change if electric bill is paid by landlord.Really every case is differant.Common area might not even be there.And before i spent the money on a house panel i would see if the poco could maybe help.

We are doing a 10 building office complex.Rather than have put up own lighting for parking lot they chose to have the poco own ,install and maintain 6 pole lights.Smart move since each building is privately owned and only the parking lot is owned by all 10

 

[iwire]

Re: Multi-family house question

Originally posted by jimwalker:
Things change if electric bill is paid by landlord.Really every case is different.

Jim in my area that is now illegal or at least not allowed by the POCOs one or the other.

Only existing apartment buildings can go that route, all new construction the tenants get a meter and common area loads can not be placed on the tenant panels.

The idea of renting POCO lighting is a good one though.

[ August 21, 2005, 09:35 AM: Message edited by: iwire ]

 

[physis]

Re: Multi-family house question

If the elctrical code is to safeguard persons and property from hazards arising from using electricity, Why aren't the required outdoor lights required to be over the required outdoor receptacles?

That way, you wouldn't need a 100 amp sevice panel and seperate utility account to make sure nobody gets hurt by electricity because they can't quite tell if the pink flamingos are real or plastic.