• Welcome to The Building Code Forum

    Your premier resource for building code knowledge.

    This forum remains free to the public thanks to the generous support of our Sawhorse Members and Corporate Sponsors. Their contributions help keep this community thriving and accessible.

    Want enhanced access to expert discussions and exclusive features? Learn more about the benefits here.

    Ready to upgrade? Log in and upgrade now.

2009 Code Commentary Explanation Request for Section 508.4 - Separated Occupancies

M

Mech

REGISTERED
Joined
Oct 30, 2009
Messages
1,056
Location
Eastern PA
2009 IBC

Code Section

508.4.3 Allowable height. Each separated occupancy shall comply with the building height limitations based on the type of construction of the building in accordance with Section 503.1.

Exception: Special provisions permitted by Section 509.

Commentary Section

The allowable height is occupancy dependant. As long as individual occupancies meet the height limitations based upon a measurement from grade plane then the building complies. For example, a building of Type IIB construction with no increases for sprinklers containing a Group B occupancy and a Group F-2 occupancy could be four stories. The only limitation in this case, in terms of building height, would be that the Group F-2 occupancy could not be located any higher than the third story.

Question

The commentary section mentions a four story building. How is that possible? Both B and F-2 occupancies (type 2B construction) are restricted to three story buildings per Table 503. Is there a typo in there somewhere?
 
I agree it's a typo. However, B occupancy in Type IIB was allowed 4 stories in the 2006 Code. Could be a cut and paste from the last commentary.
 
Extra story for sprinklers?..... :) .....Interesting.....About time something in table 503 changes. I wouldn't think it would be getting more restrictive though.....
 
Thanks mjesse.

Assume from the 2009 IBC that there is a type 2B building with S-1 and S-2 separated occupancies.

S-1 is allowed two stories and S-2 is allowed three stories.

Would it be accurate to say that a type 2B building with S-1 and S-2 separated occupancies could have 3 stories, provided the S-1 occupancy is limited to the first two stories.

Thanks again.
 
Mech said:
Would it be accurate to say that a type 2B building with S-1 and S-2 separated occupancies could have 3 stories, provided the S-1 occupancy is limited to the first two stories..
Click to expand...
That's how I interpret it.
 
Unfortunately there seems to be a lot of "cut and paste" in the commentaries. I know it's a lot of work to put them together but...
 
JBI said:
Sneak peek at the 2015... They've split Table 503 into separate tables. Four of them I believe.
Click to expand...
It's actually three tables. In writing my book based on the 2015 IBC, it took me about 3 times longer to explain calculating allowable height and area. I don't understand the reasoning behind the separate tables. Whatever difficulty people may have had probably could have been covered in the written portion.
 
Generally I agree with you Ron. They could have just reformatted the table a bit to clarify the 'height in feet' across the top and saved a lot of aggravation IMHO.
 
The ICC only performs the secretarial function. While anyone may propose changes, nothing gets in the code that wasn't voted in by governmental member employees (building inspectors-officials).
 
I guess we will be able to tell if it is an office or storage room by the live load sign in braille by the door.......

[A] 106.1 Live loads posted.

Where the live loads for which each floor or portion thereof of a commercial or industrial building is or has been designed to exceed 50 psf (2.40 kN/m2), such design live loads shall be conspicuously posted by the owner in that part of each story in which they apply, using durable signs. It shall be unlawful to remove or deface such notices.
 
JBI said:
Not exactly an accurate statement rogerpa. Not all voting members are govt officials.
Click to expand...
OK. Members of the CBA, ZBA, jurisdiction planning authorities, and other policy makers of the jurisdiction may also be designated as voters. My point was that ICC does not write code, and therefore creating job security and changing code for the purpose of selling (new) books is beyond the control of ICC.
 
rogerpa, How about the Sprinkler Association and other regulated parties that participate in the process? (read as 'Vote on Code changes')

The ICC does write code. It is done trough a consensus process that includes (but is not limited to) govt officials.
 
ICC staff does NOT write code. They facilitate the code writing process. While anyone can propose a code change, only governmental entities who hold membership in ICC have voting rights. As far as I know, the Sprinkler Association does not hold voting rights. They did however, (I believe) "buy" the votes of several of the voting members. I personally counted 11 buses in Minneapolis when the sprinkler requirement was approved. The vast majority of those in the room left immediately after that vote was taken despite pleas to remain and vote on other fire related issues made by Sean DeCrane.

If you have evidence that the Sprinkler Association has "legitimate" voting rights, please share with me.

ARTICLE II — MEMBERSHIP

2.1 Categories of Membership - The Council shall have the following categories of voting membership:

2.1.1 Governmental Member - A Governmental Member shall be a governmental unit, department or agency engaged in the administration, formulation, implementation or enforcement of laws, ordinances, rules or regulations relating to the public health, safety and welfare. Each Governmental Member shall designate its Primary Representative who will receive benefits of membership in the Council on behalf of the Governmental Member as determined by the Board of Directors from time to time.

2.1.1.1 Governmental Member Voting Representatives - Each Governmental Member shall exercise its right to vote through its designated Governmental Member Voting Representatives, and shall be entitled to the number of Governmental Member Voting Representatives as specified in Table 2.1.1.1. Governmental Member Voting Representatives shall be designated in writing, by the Governmental Member, and shall be employees or officials of the Governmental Member or departments of the Governmental Member, provided that each of the designated voting representatives shall be an employee or a public official actively engaged either full or part time, in the administration, formulation, implementation or enforcement of laws, ordinances, rules or regulations relating to the public health, safety and welfare. The designation of a Governmental Member Voting Representative may be changed by the Governmental Member, in writing, from time to time.
 
JBI:

ICC members are allowed to vote during the committee action hearings. However, during the final action hearings, only the governmental members are allowed to vote on the final code content. The public may make oral presentations opposing or supporting a proposed code change, but they don't get to vote.

ICC staff does not write any code. They'll published the code using content that was approved during the code development process. They may make editorial changes (e.g. spelling grammar, etc.), but actual requirements are never inserted by ICC.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top