| description abstract | For centuries, party walls have been a common construction practice in many countries. In New York City (NYC), they have been used since the 1700s. The city accounts for about 201,000 attached buildings. The historic NYC speculative construction practice relied heavily on attached row houses built by the same developer; agreements were rarely drafted and the number of party walls or remnants thereof is not certain. This paper examines the issues related to new construction involving existing party walls. Insufficient prior investigations led to redesigns, accidents, or delays. Out of concerns of pounding during earthquakes, recent building codes require structures be separated by a gap, involuntarily complicating even alterations along party walls. The longest delays, though, are caused by adjoining owners opposed to the development or intent to maximize financial gains through litigation. They resist inspections or any physical attachment to walls, even necessary repairs. The study juxtaposes 15 years of building violations, incidents, construction regulations, and legal decisions. It tracks construction accidents that led to building regulations increasingly progressing from empirical to engineered construction safety inspections. In turn, these prompted a 10-fold increase in court petitions based on statutes, but only minor changes in common law. Concerns are raised that some litigations may set aside safety and structural stability issues. Analysis of typical party wall scenarios concludes that in almost all cases development requires licenses to inspect and repair. In their absence, architectural and structural solutions need to account for risks posed by legal uncertainties. | |
