• 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.

Allowable Stories I-2 Occupancy Question

A

awalker

Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2015
Messages
4
Location
Oregon
First post to the forum...looking forward to some productive discussion.

We are in the process of designing a dementia care facility and in trying to calculate allowable building area, height, etc. I came across something I'd never noticed and wondered if there is something to it, or if it's just wishful thinking.

Basically, what we'd like to do is construct a 2-story Group I-2 facility as Type VA Sprinklered building. Adding Sprinklers usually means a height and story increase to the limits in Table 503. This is clearly stated in 504.2:

"...the value specified in Table 503 for maximum building height is increased by 20 feet and the maximum number of stories is increased by one."

However, in Exception 1 of 504.2 it indicates the following:

"Exception: The use of an automatic sprinkler system to increase building heights shall not be permitted for the following conditions:

1. Buildings, or portions of buildings, classified as a Group I-2 occupancy of Type IIB, III, IV or V construction."

This exception says nothing about "Stories" only "Height". So am I interpreting this correctly that so long as my building is under 50' tall (per limit on table 503) that I can building a 2-story Group I-2 occupancy building as a Type V-A Sprinklered structure?

Thanks in advance for any input.
 
My 2012 IBC table 503 has stories and areas, for I occupancy the limit is one story and 9500 sq ft. Additionally the language for exception may be limited to height, but the stories is still one per the table.

Don't have time right now, but the ICC code commentary may explain this situation.
 
Which edition ibc would you like to use??

And do you have to comply with 101?
 
09 commentary

This section permits the building height limitations of Table 503 to be increased one story and 20 feet (6096 mm) when the building is protected throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system. When used in this context, the phrase "equipped throughout" (see Section 903.3.1.1) means the entire structure is provided with sprinkler protection, and the only exceptions are the specific locations identified in Section 903.3.1.1.1 or in the applicable standard. If a building contains an area that meets the conditions of Section 903.3.1.1.1 or an exception in the applicable standard, then sprinklers may be omitted in that specific location of the building and the building is still considered protected throughout (see the commentary to Section 903.3.1.1.1 for application of the exceptions).

By referencing Section 903.3.1.1, the code requires a system in accordance with NFPA 13 (not NFPA 13R or NFPA 13D). Only buildings equipped throughout with systems installed in accordance with NFPA 13 qualify for the height increase. The systems and coverage criteria of NFPA 13R and 13D are specifically for residential occupancies and do not afford the same type of protection as an NFPA 13 system provides. More specifically, buildings of residential occupancies are permitted to receive an increase of one story and 20 feet (6096 mm) up to a maximum of four stories and 60 feet (18 288 mm) if equipped with a sprinkler system that conforms to Section 903.3.1.2 (an NFPA 13R system). This alternative is intended to address the differences between application and protection provided by an NFPA 13 system versus an NFPA 13R system. Note that no increase is allowed for an NFPA 13D system, which is specifically scoped for one- and two-family residential buildings. If a Group R building is protected throughout with an NFPA 13 system in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1, then the four-story, 60-foot (18 288 mm) limitation would not apply. It should be noted that NFPA 13R systems are limited to buildings that are four stories or less in height above grade plane.

It should also be noted that the height increase is permitted even if the sprinkler system is required by Chapter 9 of the code, based on the use and size of the building. For instance, Section 903.2.8 requires all buildings containing Group R fire areas to be sprinklered. Even so, a Type VA, Group R-2 building protected throughout with an NFPA 13R system (in accordance with Section 903.3.1.2) is allowed up to four stories (one story more than the story limitation shown in Table 503 for Group R-2, Type VA construction) and up to 60 feet (18 288 mm) in height.

Please note that the height increase can be combined with an area increase in accordance with Section 506.3.

On the other hand, an NFPA 13R sprinkler system would not yield a height-in-stories increase for a Type IIB building of Group R-2, since Table 503 already permits four stories. The height-in-feet threshold, however, would be 60 feet (18 288 mm), a 5-foot (1524 mm) increase over what is allowed by Table 503 for Type IIB construction. If the Group R-2 building is protected throughout with a system in accordance with NFPA 13 (see Section 903.3.1.1), then the height thresholds would be five stories and 75 feet (22 860 mm) [the permitted one-story, 20-foot (6096 mm) increase over the Table 503 limits].

The three exceptions to this section each describe circumstances where the height increases allowed by this section would not be permitted.

Exception 1 indicates several types of construction are eliminated from the height increase for buildings, or portions of buildings, containing a Group I-2 occupancy. Each of these types of construction either lacks the fire-resistance rating deemed necessary or includes combustible construction materials in a use where the occupants must rely on the fire sprinkler system for defend-in-place protection.

Exception 2 indicates buildings, or portions of buildings, containing a Group H-1, H-2, H-3 or H-5 occupancy are not eligible for the general height increase because of the higher hazards associated with these occupancies.

Exception 3 states that when an automatic sprinkler system is installed to address the allowed trade-off of sprinklers for 1-hour fire-resistance-rated construction given in Note d of Table 601, the height increase allowed in this section cannot be taken. For example, in a building constructed using Type IIA construction, the required 1-hour fire-resistance rating of all structural members (with the exception of the exterior walls) could be reduced to zero if the building was equipped throughout with a sprinkler system in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 (NFPA 13 system). However, the allowable height for the occupancy classification of, for example, Group B for Type IIA construction could not be increased by 20 feet (6096 mm) to 85 feet (25 908 mm), as would otherwise be allowed in this section.
 
I appreciate the input thus far, but what I'm getting at is really the code defined difference between "Stories" and "Height". They are not the same thing as defined in Chapter 2, yet in this Exception 1 that I referenced under 504.2. I think most people assume...as have I for many years, that when it says "Height" it means both "Height and Stories", which I don't think it does. I think it means JUST "Height". In which case the part of 504.2 that says that the mas number of stories is increased by one still applies meaning that on Table 503 the height remains capped at 50', but the allowable stories increases to 2.

I know it feels like I'm parsing words, but the code is full areas open to interpretation which is why there exists a commentary.

Anyone see what I'm seeing or am I wrong?
 
It's written plainly enough; the preceding paragraph allows for height and story increase. The exception permits an increase in story but not height.

Now a conundrum; it appears the 2015 IBC Table 504.4 does not permit a story increase for I-2 except for Type 1 & 2A!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Exception 1 indicates several types of construction are eliminated from the height increase for buildings, or portions of buildings, containing a Group I-2 occupancy. Each of these types of construction either lacks the fire-resistance rating deemed necessary or includes combustible construction materials in a use where the occupants must rely on the fire sprinkler
 
Francis Vineyard said:
awalker I'd would say it's an error since the exception is only in the 2012. At this time there's no errata of this exception for both the 2012 and 2015 editions.
Click to expand...
Getting totally lost

Where is the exception in2015??
 
The same exception is in 2006 and prevents a height increase in Type V. I read that as height equals feet and stories.
 
Thanks everyone! Good discussion.

I honestly think it's an oversight in the language of the exception, but per the letter of the law I'm sure I could sway a plan checker or two in my favor :-). The bigger question though is whether having a 2 story Type V-A Sprinklered building is somehow unsafe for an Assisted Living Dementia Care I-2 Occupancy. That might depend on the local fire official's interpretation and tolerance for risk in a potential rescue of this population. I know we can build them in CA as an R2.1 which leads me to believe not everyone is on the same page quite yet.

This project is in the initial planning stages and will be in Utah. Their model code is still based on 2012 IBC, but I'm sure by the time we get around to submitting plans for this project the 2015 IBC will be on schedule for adoption. Is the text of it available online anywhere?
 
awalker said:
Thanks everyone! Good discussion. I honestly think it's an oversight in the language of the exception, but per the letter of the law I'm sure I could sway a plan checker or two in my favor :-). The bigger question though is whether having a 2 story Type V-A Sprinklered building is somehow unsafe for an Assisted Living Dementia Care I-2 Occupancy. That might depend on the local fire official's interpretation and tolerance for risk in a potential rescue of this population. I know we can build them in CA as an R2.1 which leads me to believe not everyone is on the same page quite yet.

This project is in the initial planning stages and will be in Utah. Their model code is still based on 2012 IBC, but I'm sure by the time we get around to submitting plans for this project the 2015 IBC will be on schedule for adoption. Is the text of it available online anywhere?
Click to expand...
101 may not allow two story
 
awalker said:
Thanks everyone! Good discussion. I honestly think it's an oversight in the language of the exception, but per the letter of the law I'm sure I could sway a plan checker or two in my favor :-). The bigger question though is whether having a 2 story Type V-A Sprinklered building is somehow unsafe for an Assisted Living Dementia Care I-2 Occupancy. That might depend on the local fire official's interpretation and tolerance for risk in a potential rescue of this population. I know we can build them in CA as an R2.1 which leads me to believe not everyone is on the same page quite yet.

This project is in the initial planning stages and will be in Utah. Their model code is still based on 2012 IBC, but I'm sure by the time we get around to submitting plans for this project the 2015 IBC will be on schedule for adoption. Is the text of it available online anywhere?
Click to expand...
101 may not allow two story
 
So...had a great talk with the Building Official in the town where we would like to locate this project. Turns out Utah Code officials recognized the unique condition and wrote their own amendment to address as follows:

(6) In IBC, Section 504.2, a new section is added as follows: "504.2.1 Notwithstanding the exceptions to Section 504.2, Group I-2 Assisted Living Facilities shall be allowed to be two stories of Type V-A construction when all of the following apply:

1. All secured units are located at the level of exit discharge in compliance with Section 1008.1.9.3 as amended;

2. The total combined area of both stories shall not exceed the total allowable area for a one-story building; and

3. All other provisions that apply in Section 407 have been provided."

So this then begs the question for item 1. Is a Dementia Care Unit a "Secured Unit". I can't find it defined....guess I'll call the BO back.
 
Hate to say seems like they bumped "assisted living" to an I-2???

My term for assisted living is prior to nursing home care. The person can still get around, maybe with a walker or wheel chair, with a little help. Still functioning at a good level.

Would not place in same category as dementia facility

Guess since they wrote it they need to define all terms
 
From the governor::

Some light reading

http://dfcm.utah.gov/downloads/bldg_official/codes_in_use.pdf

IBC Section 308.2.1 is added as follows: "308.2.1 Assisted living facilities and related occupancies. The following words and terms shall, for the purposes of this section and as used elsewhere in this code, have the meanings shown herein.

TYPE I ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY. A residential facility licensed by the Utah Department of Health that provides a protected living arrangement for ambulatory, non-restrained persons who are capable of achieving mobility sufficient to exit the facility without the assistance of another person.

Occupancies. Limited capacity, type I assisted living facilities with two to five residents shall be classified as R-3 occupancies. Small, type I assisted living facilities with six to sixteen residents shall be classified as R-4 occupancies. Large, type I assisted living facilities with over sixteen residents shall be classified as I-1 occupancies.

TYPE II ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY. A residential facility licensed by the Utah Department of Health that provides an array of coordinated supportive personal and health care services to residents who meet the definition of semi-independent.

Semi-Independent. A person who is:

A. Physically disabled but able to direct his or her own care; or

B. Cognitively impaired or physically disabled but able to evacuate from the facility with the physical assistance of one person.

Occupancies. Limited capacity, type II assisted living facilities with two to five residents shall be classified as R-4 occupancies. Small, type II assisted living facilities with six to sixteen residents shall be classified as I-1 occupancies. Large, type II assisted living facilities with over sixteen residents shall be classified as I-2 occupancies.

RESIDENTIAL TREATMENT/SUPPORT ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY. A residential treatment/support assisted living facility which creates a group living environment for four or more residents licensed by the Utah Department of Human Services, and provides a protected living arrangement for ambulatory, non-restrained persons who are capable of achieving mobility sufficient to exit the facility without the physical assistance of another person."
 
this is 2010, but check

http://publicsafety.utah.gov/firemarshal/documents/r710-003_Assisted_Living_7-17-12.pdf

3.3.6 In Type II Assisted Living Facilities, where the clinical needs of the patients require specialized security, approved access controlled egress doors may be installed when all of the following are met:

3.3.6.1 The controlled egress doors shall unlock upon activation of the automatic fire sprinkler system or the automatic fire detection system.

3.3.6.2 The facility staff can unlock the controlled egress doors by either sensor or keypad.

3.3.6.3 The controlled egress doors shall unlock upon loss of power.

3.3.6.4 The secure area or unit with controlled egress doors shall be located at the level of exit discharge in Type V construction.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top