6. HRA SR 03-05-2012 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Ms. Annie B Deckert Director of Economic Development February 13, 2012 Page 2 Separate Wall. It indicates that if a party damages a Party Wall or the other party's Separate Wall, then the party causing the damage shall repair the damage at its cost and expense. As stated in the previous paragraph, the agreement, also indicates in this paragraph that if your building is damaged or destroyed, you are then responsible for weatherproofing and preserving the remaining Party Wall (if there is a Party Wall that had been supporting both properties) that may be left exposed at the party's cost and expense. The result, then, would be that the former Party Wall will thereafter be a Separate Wall for the remaining building. If there was not a Party Wall but instead there were two Separate Walls, then if you removed your building and Separate Wall, there would not be any obligation to do anything with regards to the remaining Separate Wall. In the present situation, the reports from Braun Intertec, dated November 17, 2011, and January 10, 2012, indicated that the buildings had Separate Walls. The Braun report indicates that the City must leave the City's Separate Wall in place "since the main girders of the adjacent building are bearing on the brick pilasters that are integrated into the wall that is to remain." In this case, the City does not have an option. The Separate Walls have become a "Party Wall" by use and need for support: I think a proper interpretation of the facts in relation to the Agreement indicates that the City must take care of the preservation and weatherization of the exposed wall as this is now a Party Wall. If you have any further questions, please contact me. Sincerely, GRAY, PLANT, MOOTY, MOOTY & BENNETT, P.A. (~ . ~~ Robert J. Walter Attorney RJW:pcg Cc: Peter Beck GP:3120880 v4