In A Square Peg in a Round Hole – Building Design v. Occupancy Use, products liability expert witness Robert L. Rowe, President of Pyrocop, Inc., writes:
As you can see, this was a significant challenge for me as the building was not protected by a fire sprinkler system and the manner of storage was inappropriate for the building design. Without question, this was a distinct fire/life safety hazard that I could not allow to continue until the building was brought up to code. After contacting both the tenant and the property management company as well as spending hours upon hours reviewing the codes trying to come up with a reasonable solution to maintain a safe building and at the same time try to preserve their business, I just could not fit “a square peg in a round hole” without the landlord and tenant spending thousands of dollars to “make it work”.
Had both the prospective tenant, the property owner or the property management company had taken the extra step in familiarizing themselves with the limitations of the building or had taken the time to inquire about viable options for this type of building use, this unfortunate scenario may have been prevented.