• Welcome to the new and improved Building Code Forum. We appreciate you being here and hope that you are getting the information that you need concerning all codes of the building trades. This is a free forum to the public due to the generosity of the Sawhorses, Corporate Supporters and Supporters who have upgraded their accounts. If you would like to have improved access to the forum please upgrade to Sawhorse by first logging in then clicking here: Upgrades

1004.1.2 Floor area allowances

steveray

steveray

SAWHORSE
Joined
Nov 25, 2009
Messages
11,751
Location
West of the river CT
Situation: New school, IB construction, 176,000SF, Occ. load of 4535, fully sprinklered, 3 story,....blah, blah, atrium, blah, blah, smoke control (won't get in to budget because it makes me cry......Semi public magnet school (not owned by the Town) with a public safety theme.....(oddly nothing about building code or construction)

Architect is using 50 net for rooms that look a whole lot like classrooms labelled as "computer graphics lab" "ems lab" and "fire science lab"and such, it seems to be a specialized classroom, but a classroom none the less.....Does anyone have a code arguement for or against this? (fixed in place equipment, fixed seating, etc.....)

We are definitely bumping up against the 2 exits required barrier in multiple rooms, and it is going to be difficult for them to get proper exiting and separation if it is needed.....

Anyone have a definition of "shops and other vocational room areas"?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
sound like vocational to me???

maybe ask for seating chart to see how many they actualy plan to stick in the room???
 
Thanks CDA.....they penciled it down using 50net instead of 20net, and then brought that number back up to an actual (less than 50)....problem is, if they had used 50 there are several rooms that would not meet exiting requirements......the seats they show are the numbers they used....there is no large equipment or anything that makes me lean toward "vocational" in these rooms....
 
cda said:
maybe ask for seating chart to see how many they actualy plan to stick in the room???
Click to expand...
That is funny! Planning. hehe.

Steve, you might want to look at the teacher contracts to see what the maximum class size is and base it off of that as a reasonable account...although, then they just usually put two teachers in the class room. Around here, I would say that they will stuff as many kids into the room as they can, but maybe for this school, the Charter sets a maximum.

You might get a letter of operations that clarifies maximum classroom size for the labs and then require it to be posted as a condition of 1004.1.1's exception for reduced design occupant loading.
 
I do a lot of university and college work, and I would apply the shop/vocational occupant load to this type of space.

However, as a consultant to the architect, I also ask for a furniture layout and compare the occupant loads. Usually the shop/vocational load exceeds the planned load, so I stay with shop/vocational load factor of 50 sf/occupant.

There are rare occasions when the planned load exceeds the calculated shop/vocational load and the prescribed classroom load factor of 20 sf/occupant provides an occupant load that far exceeds the planned load; therefore, I use the shop/vocational load factor and invoke Section 1004.2 to increase the load to the planned load.
 
Thanks everyone!....Ron.....they are doing this in at least 10 rooms....one of them they actually have labelled classroom/lab and they still used 50.....if it was one or two rooms I wouldn't be too concerned, it's about 50% of their "classrooms"......
 
Labs and shops are, in essence, classrooms, but not in the arrangement that is traditionally associated with a "classroom"--closely spaced rows of desks and chairs.
 
Ask for a furnishings plan to confirm it. Computer graphics or CADD will usually have tables twice as wide as a typical desk. EMS may have an ambulance simulator. Many vocational classrooms in our community colleges have normal desks in one corner of the room, then training equipment in most of the room.
 
One per 20, unless they can prove otherwise.

And to me, proof would be specialized construction or fixtures- e.g. power for shop equipment, gas for cooking appliances, lab casework, etc.

To put it another way, if there is no substantial difference in the room construction between the "shop" and a classroom, it's a classroom.
 
Exception: Where approved by the building official , the actual number of occupants for whom each occupied space, floor or building is designed, although less than those determined by calculation, shall be permitted to be used in the determination of the design occupant load .

I agree with brudgers.

They are classrooms and you start with an OL of 20 sq ft per person. A shop or vocational room will have fixed equipment.

A computor lab will have fixed work stations, just count them.
 
I would agree with mtlogcabin and brudgers, have them show the proof in the form of fixed equip. etc. on the plans otherwise 20 per it is.
 
Glad to start hearing some opinions going the other way.....I certainly try to err on the side of safety....nothing I have seen as of yet sways me towards the 50 net.....I do not see any less of a density than the normal classrooms with the seating they are showing on their plans...If they can give me some more documentation or justify it in another way I might bite, but for now I am still a skeptic and the plan review comment list is getting longer......Thanks Again All!
 
brudgers said:
One per 20, unless they can prove otherwise. And to me, proof would be specialized construction or fixtures- e.g. power for shop equipment, gas for cooking appliances, lab casework, etc.

To put it another way, if there is no substantial difference in the room construction between the "shop" and a classroom, it's a classroom.
Click to expand...
With that said, what prevents a plans examiner from calling a space indicated on the drawings as a large open office space (at 100 sf/occupant) a large conference room (at 15 sf/occupant)? There are likely no fixed furnishings or equipment--there probably "is no substantial difference in the room construction" either.

A computer lab can be just like any other school lab. Use what the designer says it will be used for; and if used differently once occupied, the jurisdiction has a means to cite the owners for changing the occupancy and requiring corrective measures.
 
RLGA said:
With that said, what prevents a plans examiner from calling a space indicated on the drawings as a large open office space (at 100 sf/occupant) a large conference room (at 15 sf/occupant)? There are likely no fixed furnishings or equipment--there probably "is no substantial difference in the room construction" either. A computer lab can be just like any other school lab. Use what the designer says it will be used for; and if used differently once occupied, the jurisdiction has a means to cite the owners for changing the occupancy and requiring corrective measures.
Click to expand...
There's either a way to get power to all the cubicles, or there isn't. Likewise, a computer lab will be designed to power the lab's computers.
 
Thanks Ron...I do appreciate opinions and perspectives from both sides......I do not want to dump an enforcement issue on the FM if I do not have to....they are part of the review process, but I have not met with them yet.....we will see what they think....I am calling the designer this AM with some informal questions and I will see how he handles them...

RLGA said:
With that said, what prevents a plans examiner from calling a space indicated on the drawings as a large open office space (at 100 sf/occupant) a large conference room (at 15 sf/occupant)? There are likely no fixed furnishings or equipment--there probably "is no substantial difference in the room construction" either.A computer lab can be just like any other school lab. Use what the designer says it will be used for; and if used differently once occupied, the jurisdiction has a means to cite the owners for changing the occupancy and requiring corrective measures.
Click to expand...
 
Asking questions, documenting, providing paper trai,l on the plans , "good". passing the buck so as to cite later. "not good"
 
Asking questions, documenting, providing paper trail, on the plans. "good". Passing the buck to cite later, "not good".
 
kilitact said:
Asking questions, documenting, providing paper trail, on the plans. "good". Passing the buck to cite later, "not good".
Click to expand...
It's not passing the buck--everything approved and inspected by the building department is subject to subsequent inspection after occupancy and possible citations if violations or changes are found.

If there is serious doubt that a space will be used as indicated, it should be addressed by the plans examiner. However, just because a space looks like a classroom, but is labeled a lab, is not prima facie evidence that the space is not a lab.
 
RLGA said:
It's not passing the buck--everything approved and inspected by the building department is subject to subsequent inspection after occupancy and possible citations if violations or changes are found. If there is serious doubt that a space will be used as indicated, it should be addressed by the plans examiner. However, just because a space looks like a classroom, but is labeled a lab, is not prima facie evidence that the space is not a lab.
Click to expand...
I agree in principle. But when it comes to life-safety calculations, I ask myself, "Self, what are they gaining by doing it this way?"

If an extra 300 occupants doesn't change anything, then the calculations are just a matter of professional accuracy by the architect.

If the extra 300 occupants trigger an additional stair, then it is a somewhat different matter.

Finally, a "Maximum Occupant Load" sign requirement, may be middle ground.
 
brudgers: I agree. However, the situation may even be more broader than just adding a stair.

The increased occupant load in each space--if exceeding 49--will directly affect the spaces, as well as the entire building, such as changing each applicable space from a Group B to an Group A (which impacts allowable area and height), additional fire-resistive construction for occupancy separation (if separated occupancies are used--if nonseparated, then height and area are greatly affected), adding another door to each space, installing exit signs in each space (since two doors are now required), etc.

All of this will have a significant impact on the building's cost.
 
Spoke with the DP and let him know we would be looking for a little more documentation on large furniture or equipment or something tangible that we all can hang our hats on for these spaces to be calculated as as 50 net...prior to issuing a permit....
 
RLGA said:
brudgers: I agree. However, the situation may even be more broader than just adding a stair. The increased occupant load in each space--if exceeding 49--will directly affect the spaces, as well as the entire building, such as changing each applicable space from a Group B to an Group A (which impacts allowable area and height), additional fire-resistive construction for occupancy separation (if separated occupancies are used--if nonseparated, then height and area are greatly affected), adding another door to each space, installing exit signs in each space (since two doors are now required), etc. All of this will have a significant impact on the building's cost.
Click to expand...
Yep. That's my point.

Though I suspect a "semi-public magnet school" would be Occupancy Group E.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top