• 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

"Assisted Living Facility" Occupancy Group

floydman

Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2009
Messages
25
Location
Lone Star State
Ok i'll get this page started I have an assisted living facility going into an existing building proposed six occupants 2006 IBC, approximate 2000 sq. ft,. The applicant states that occupants will get assistance in bathing, daily dressing undressing, toileting, ect. My take is per Sec. 308.2 "The occupants are capable of responding to an emergency situation without physical assistance from staff" that this should be I-2 not I-1, R-3 or R-4 because of applicants description of occupants I do not believe occupants will be capable of responding to emergency situation. What do you think is it a stretch to classify this I-2?
 

mtlogcabin

Sawhorse
Joined
Oct 17, 2009
Messages
7,864
Location
Big Sky Country
I get with the health department ( they issue the state license here) and see what care the facility is licensed to provide and how much staff is required. This will give me a better understanding of the operations and physical and mental limitations of the residents and honestly has let me sleep at night when my first gut reaction was "no way"
 

peach

Registered User
Joined
Oct 17, 2009
Messages
2,834
Location
metro DC
Women who have breast implants need help dressing, undressing, toileting, bathing.. but that's a temporary situation, not long term.

having said that (for whatever reason I thought I should).. probably I-2.
 

north star

Sawhorse
Joined
Oct 19, 2009
Messages
4,012
* * *

floydman,

Welcome to the Codes Forum! This is " THE " codes place to be! :D



I concur with mtlogcabin! You definitely want to get with your

health department and discuss facility characteristics and

capabilities, while doing the plans review. Also, with your own

local fire department. They will be the ones performing the

periodic inspections.



* * *
 

cda

Sawhorse 123
Joined
Oct 19, 2009
Messages
19,330
Location
Basement
Sheen you talk existing facility are you talking house???

Same question as others is there a state or federal agency that regulated it also?????

Sometimes they require more then local codes and also classify them a little tougher
 

floydman

Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2009
Messages
25
Location
Lone Star State
No this is not a house it is a commercial building yes there is a state agency regulating it also waiting on decision from state on how they will classify it.
 

peach

Registered User
Joined
Oct 17, 2009
Messages
2,834
Location
metro DC
Wait for the state to respond... but are the residents bed-ridden? If so, it's not an R anything. IF it's a situation where the residents are developmentally disabled but need to be reminded to take a shower, do your laundry.. clean your dishes.. but they can respond to a fire alarm and ambulate themselves to the outside by themselves, I'd buy R-4.

My oldest son has a developmental disability - he is now able to live by himself and support himself...
 

RJJ

Platinum Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2009
Messages
2,940
Location
about 1' east of the white water
If they have staff round the clock I2. If it is short term like just the morning and evening it could be R-4. Just had a meeting in a rather large unit with different section set as different occupancies. The state came back on the yearly inspection for a single floor of a new addition and classified it I-2. I had reviewed and approved the plans as I-2. The owner didn't realize that the building already complied. The state inspector agreed and told them to white out the r-4 and make it an I-2. Everybody was happy!
 

peach

Registered User
Joined
Oct 17, 2009
Messages
2,834
Location
metro DC
Assisted living facilities are I-1.. housing more than 16 persons. If the residents aren't bed riddden, maybe I-2 is harsh..

R-4 is for more than 5 and less than 16 excluding staff.. I might rethink I-2

I-2 is for ... "persons who are not capable of self preservations.. like detox facilities, hospitals, mental hospitals and nursing homes".

Again, I ask.. are the residents able to respond to a fire alarm and have the capacity to understand "get the hell out of the building"?

I am thinking R-4 (ok.. I can change my mind.. I changed my socks this morning)
 
Last edited by a moderator:

RJJ

Platinum Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2009
Messages
2,940
Location
about 1' east of the white water
This has always been for me one of the most confusing sections of code. I2 r4 etc. Not more then this or that many people. The code is clear but the issues become gray. At plan review it is very hard to determine if say Mrs. Jones is capable of self preservation. She may be at time of occupancy, but what about 3 months down the street. We make decisions base on info provided in a sterile situation. Then as time passes we find things to be different.

I have just in the last two weeks had several properties come back for reclassification. In PA the State oversees these facilities. They have a large list of regulations that don't parallel the IBC. The thinking is also beyond the code. Now I have just had an R4 approved be fore me, be re licensed to be an I2. When I reviewed the plans I considered it an I2. So no big deal. Yet another one that was listed as a B is now being demanded by the state to be a C1. These letters Do not match up to anything in the code. don't be concerned about the letters B or C1 they don't match anything either. The heart of the issue is that during a fire drill it was observed that the staff had placed a hand on the shoulder of an individual and directed them in another direction. There exists some major voids for the code official to deal with. Now base on that observation as fire official I need to re classify the building. GLTJ!
 

RJJ

Platinum Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2009
Messages
2,940
Location
about 1' east of the white water
This has always been for me one of the most confusing sections of code. I2 r4 etc. Not more then this or that many people. The code is clear but the issues become gray. At plan review it is very hard to determine if say Mrs. Jones is capable of self preservation. She may be at time of occupancy, but what about 3 months down the street. We make decisions base on info provided in a sterile situation. Then as time passes we find things to be different.

I have just in the last two weeks had several properties come back for reclassification. In PA the State oversees these facilities. They have a large list of regulations that don't parallel the IBC. The thinking is also beyond the code. Now I have just had an R4 approved be fore me, be re licensed to be an I2. When I reviewed the plans I considered it an I2. So no big deal. Yet another one that was listed as a B is now being demanded by the state to be a C1. These letters Do not match up to anything in the code. don't be concerned about the letters B or C1 they don't match anything either. The heart of the issue is that during a fire drill it was observed that the staff had placed a hand on the shoulder of an individual and directed them in another direction. There exists some major voids for the code official to deal with. Now base on that observation as fire official I need to re classify the building. GLTJ!
 

peach

Registered User
Joined
Oct 17, 2009
Messages
2,834
Location
metro DC
I think I-1 may be more appropriate.... it's a supervised residential environment that provides personal care services.. and it can be a VB building. (Can't be if its I-2).
 

Yankee

Registered User
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
1,344
Location
New England
What am I missing . . . speaking Building Codes, I see Residential R3 if less than 16 people UNLESS they are transient in nature or they are incapable of self preservation, and I don't think that means Granny is in a wheelchair or Aunti Clara takes sleeping pills (and I am not suggesting there needs to be a family relationship, it is a congregate living facility). And why wouldn't it fit actually under the IRC?

In what sense is it considered a "commercial" building? Is there a mixed use issue?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

peach

Registered User
Joined
Oct 17, 2009
Messages
2,834
Location
metro DC
congregate living facility isn't the same as assisted living, Yankee.

A congregate living facility would be, for example, 5 college kids living together and sharing the daily tasks of the household, but don't need assistance with personal care.
 

Yankee

Registered User
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
1,344
Location
New England
Never the less, those living congruential can be older adults and can have hired help for daily chores and tasks. . . step through the I group;

I 1 has to have 16 or more, this doesn't fit

I 2 have to be incapable of self preservation, I think "incapable" is a pretty high standard

I 3 not in jail

I 4 Less than 24 hours

What is being suggested does not fit into any I category UNLESS the "not capable" standard is met, and as Peach points out many people need some kind of "assistance" who are otherwise very capable of both doing and understanding how and when to exit a building. Where is assisted living defined as not capable?

Single Family under IRC or R3. How does this not fit?

I have a IRC with 5 assisted living and one full time live in staff, they no doubt kept that number for fear of the "6" number and I am not sure it matters, the "16" number might prevail.

And what makes this a commercial building?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

peach

Registered User
Joined
Oct 17, 2009
Messages
2,834
Location
metro DC
that's why this arguement needs to be made in plan review... don't let the field inspector classify occupancy or type of construction.
 

jpranch

Platinum Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2009
Messages
1,963
Location
Gillette Wyoming
The "new" R-4 use group was a hugh mistake back in the day. It just confused the issues more. Ahhhh, bring back the BOCA code please. Agree with peach and rjj. The use of a building or space is always determined in plan review. There is always the game of calling it I-2 to start and backing off if you need to. Sometimes it works well. Did that this past month with a high hazard use. It has the effect of bringing more information to the table when the dp, contractor, or owner is lets say, less than forthcoming?
 

Yankee

Registered User
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
1,344
Location
New England
RJJ said:
peach: I agree! Plan review is the critical point to the argument.
It comes down to the self preservation aspect and I'd be very cautious with that one. If this is a developmentally disabled household, then the occupants have been judged to be capable of taking care of themselves to a large degree. The point of the household is to continue to allow them to develop the skills to live completely unassisted.

Think of this, if you had a household of adults and three of them were in wheelchairs, would you (upon plan review of course ; ) call the dwelling an I2? I don't think so ~
 
Top