Training room A in a B office space needing 100lb live load?

[JPohling]

I have a plan check correction requesting verification of the floor loading to provide 100lb live load for a training room that is a part of an office suite build out because it is an A occupancy. Unfortunately the floor does not calc out for the 100lb live load. It is also greater than 10% of the suite area.

There was another thread that people were discussing that they did not believe that it is truly an A occupancy just because we are over 50 occupants. We are at 89 occupants currently. I have always treated this as an A.

How do you interpret this? 2016 California Building Code

 

[mark handler]

And where did he/she come up with that number?
What type of training?

 

[JPohling]

This is an office for a company that provides security guards. The training is just for the guards on tables and chairs.
Plan reviewer is referencing CBC 1607 for the 100 lb live load requirement. Table 1607.1 under Assembly

 

[RLGA]

Table 1607.1 does not directly correlate with either occupancy group per Chapter 3 or occupant load factors per Chapter 10. Therefore, since this is a "classroom" situation, would they permit the use of 40 psf per Table 1607.1? Thus, since offices are required to be 50 psf, the existing condition would be acceptable for a classroom condition.

 

[JPohling]

They have not in the past, but I will give it a shot.

 

[mark handler]

Bring up and show tables and chairs

 

[JPohling]

Training tables and chairs always shown. I sent letter to higher ups to see what kind of response I get. Training room is also right at 10% of suite area so I am checking if they would accept it as an accessory occupancy to the "B"

 

[Sifu]

I agree with RLGA, I am not sure getting it classified as a small assembly space per ch. 3 or an accessory occupancy per 508.2 would make any difference. I think table 1607.1 is based on use, not occupancy classification, similar to table 1004.1.2. The "use" is for more people than the typical B office load, therefore increased structural capability. However, if you try the school classroom load, it might also be required to be designed for the 1,000lb concentrated load, where the assembly movable seat load would not. Either way, I question the intent of getting it reduced. If the intent is to load more people than would be normally be permitted at 50lb, why would anyone want to overload the floor? (I can see the headlines now)

 

[ADAguy]

How many square feet does an adult occupy? If said adult is in excess of 250lbs as many are today, what is their typical PSI?

 

[ADAguy]

Found this:
Serious research was performed on this subject... over 100 years age. The results were printed in my 1937 "Trautwine - The Civil Engineer's Reference Book" on page 726 (copy attached below). The result is essentially 80 to 180 PSF, depending on assumptions.

I consider 100 PSF (200 pound person occupying an area 1 ft x 2 ft) to be a reasonable number for a packed crowd for two reasons:

1. IBC lists 100 PSF for several applications where crowds gather such as dance halls, restaurants, stairs (perhaps during fire drills), public rooms in hotels, etc.

2. Live load reduction for 100 PSF (and greater) is not allowed by IBC. IMHO, since people could gather just about anywhere for numerous reasons, live load reduction would not be wise anyway.

 

[Francis Vineyard]

Training tables and chairs always shown. I sent letter to higher ups to see what kind of response I get. Training room is also right at 10% of suite area so I am checking if they would accept it as an accessory occupancy to the "B"

From the IEBC as applicable where adopted;

1007.1 Gravity loads. Buildings or portions thereof subject to a change of occupancy where such change in the nature of occupancy results in higher uniform or concentrated loads based on Table 1607.1 of the International Building Code shall comply with the gravity load provisions of the International Building Code.

Exception: Structural elements whose stress is not increased by more than 5 percent.

“Small floor areas are more likely to be subjected to the full uniform load than larger floor areas.”

 

[JPohling]

They would not allow the classroom use under 1607.1 to reduce the LL.

Resolution was to call the room a "computer training room" and fix the tables to the floor.
I can then use the City of San Diego technical bulletin 10-1 that allows an occupant load of 1/50sf net for a computer training room. This eliminates the A2 as we are less than 50 occupants. No increased live load requirement, no more panic hardware required, no more separation of occupancies required.

Better all around

 

[JBI]

The 2015 IBC now includes 'Training and skill development not in a school or academic program...' as a 'B' occupancy... Did California add this to their version for 2016?

 

[JPohling]

The 2015 IBC now includes 'Training and skill development not in a school or academic program...' as a 'B' occupancy... Did California add this to their version for 2016?

It does not appear in the 2016 CBC table 1004.1.2 regarding floor area allowances per occupant.

 

[JBI]

It does not appear in the 2016 CBC table 1004.1.2 regarding floor area allowances per occupant.

Check Chapter 3 in the 2016 CBC... Table 1004.1.2 is based on function of space but not necessarily occupancy classification. Occupant load would be based on the table, occupancy classification is Chapter 3.