Auto Dealership / Occupancy / Toilets

[SCBO1]

What does this mean then?

IBC2006, Section 706, Fire Barriers

706.3.8 Separation of mixed occupancies.

Where the provisions of Section 508.3.2 are applicable, the fire barrier separating mixed occupancies shall have a fire-resistance rating of not less than that indicated in Section 508.3.2 based on the occupancies being separated.

pc1

 

[Big Mac]

If you sprinkle, the fire-barrier should no longer be required, due to the allowance for increased floor area.

 

[brudgers]

What does this mean then? IBC2006, Section 706, Fire Barriers 706.3.8 Separation of mixed occupancies. Where the provisions of Section 508.3.2 are applicable, the fire barrier separating mixed occupancies shall have a fire-resistance rating of not less than that indicated in Section 508.3.2 based on the occupancies being separated. pc1

Unless the facility is in an unusually urbanized location for a car dealership, it probably means that there is no architect, or that the lead architect is practicing well beyond the level at which their code knowledge is sufficient to protect the public health, safety and welfare. It might also be evidence that in addition, the architect has a percentage of construction cost contract of the sort encouraged by the AIA.

 

[Big Mac]

Also, you might want to check Section 304, where motor vehicle showrooms are specifically noted as Use Group B occupancies. How would you magically determine that it is a Use Group M, when it has been specifically assigned a differnt use group by the building code?

Motor Vehicle Showrooms and offices along with the associated accessory uses - B

Storage and Shop areas - S-1

 

[SCBO1]

Note worthy. My 2006IBC code book, section 706.3.8, list 508.3.3 in that section, which is the table.

The 2006IBC CD that I copied and posted has 508.3.2. What the H***! is going on?

I'm thinking there is no seperation required.

pc1

 

[permitguy]

I believe the question regarding separation of mixed occupancies has been resolved. It was confusion about use of a fire barrier to create separate fire areas.

 

[gbhammer]

Also, you might want to check Section 304, where motor vehicle showrooms are specifically noted as Use Group B occupancies. How would you magically determine that it is a Use Group M, when it has been specifically assigned a differnt use group by the building code?Motor Vehicle Showrooms and offices along with the associated accessory uses - B

Storage and Shop areas - S-1

I would classify the building as a B/S1; but that is not to say that an M use would not be a feasible classification for a part of the building if they had vehicles, parts, and accessories on display and for sale in a showroom floor.

 

[Big Mac]

I would classify the building as a B/S1; but that is not to say that an M use would not be a feasible classification for a part of the building if they had vehicles, parts, and accessories on display and for sale in a showroom floor.

Please reconsider. MOTOR VEHICLE SHOWROOM =

 

[Big Mac]

Originally Posted by gbhammer

I would classify the building as a B/S1; but that is not to say that an M use would not be a feasible classification for a part of the building if they had vehicles, parts, and accessories on display and for sale in a showroom floor.

Sorry, sometimes I do something that causes it to post before I have completed my comment. I am quite sure it is operator error, but forthe life of me I can't figure out what.

At any rate - MOTOR VEHICLE SHOWROOM = Display, sales, etc. Of course they do sales there. it is still considered to be a 'Use Group B' occupancy as specifically stated int he code. It is not an 'M'.

 

[RLGA]

Note worthy. My 2006IBC code book, section 706.3.8, list 508.3.3 in that section, which is the table. The 2006IBC CD that I copied and posted has 508.3.2. What the H***! is going on?

I'm thinking there is no seperation required.

pc1

That was probably an editing error--I find those all the time. The first printing of the 2006 IBC had the wrong table reference in Section 706.3.8.

Also, a note of caution, the 2009 IBC made a significant change in this area regarding fire area separation. In the 2006 IBC and earlier, the fire barriers used for occupancy separation also created fire areas, and Table 706.3.9 was used for dividing a single occupancy in to multiple fire areas. The 2009 and 2012 IBC editions have created separate requirements for fire barriers used for occupancy separation and fire area separation--and they are not the same.

For example, per Table 508.4 for occupancy separation, a 2-hour fire barrier is required for separation between a Group A and a Group S-1. However, fore fire area purposes, if you wanted to place a fire barrier to separate a Group A fire area from a Group S-1 fire area, a 3-hour fire barrier is required per Table 707.3.9.

Some occupancies do not require separation for allowable area; but, to separate fire areas, a fire barrier may be required. An example is a Group B and Group S-1. Per Table 508.4, there is no required separation between the occupancies when determining allowable area per Section 508.4. However, if you wanted to separate the Group S-1 fire area from the Group B fire area, then a 3-hour fire barrier is required.

 

[gbhammer]

Originally Posted by gbhammer I would classify the building as a B/S1; but that is not to say that an M use would not be a feasible classification for a part of the building if they had vehicles, parts, and accessories on display and for sale in a showroom floor.

Sorry, sometimes I do something that causes it to post before I have completed my comment. I am quite sure it is operator error, but forthe life of me I can't figure out what.

At any rate - MOTOR VEHICLE SHOWROOM = Display, sales, etc. Of course they do sales there. it is still considered to be a 'Use Group B' occupancy as specifically stated int he code. It is not an 'M'.

As I said :agree with the B/S1. What I was saying is that if they have a show room that has a lot of goods for sale as well as vehicles on display then I would consider the M classification (like Harley showroom, they have a lot of things for sale other than bikes which most of the time you can't take right off the showroom floor, but have to order in advance). I don't know if you have the commentary but it uses the automotive showroom as an example.

2009 IBC 309.1 Commentary : …The key characteristics that differentiate occupancies classified in Group M from those classified in Group B (see section 304) are the larger quantity of goods or merchandise available for sale and the lack of familiarity of the occupants with the building, particularly its means of egress. To be classified in Group M, the goods that are on display must be accessible to the public. If a patron sees an item for sale, then that item is generally available for purchase at that time (i.e., there is a large stock of goods). If a store allows people to see the merchandise but it is not available on the premises, such as an automobile showroom, then the occupancy classification of business (Group B) should be considered.

 

[Big Mac]

gb - I guess that is possible, but I have never seen it. I would agree that the code does make provision for mxed use.

 

[sooneraia]

The main reason for contemplating the "M" classification over the "B", was the restroom count. "M" is much less restrictive in number of fixtures (w.c. in this case) required / occupant. Now you will calculate more occupants for the space, but the fixture requirement / occupant is really low (1/500 vs 1/25.....).

 

[Papio Bldg Dept]

The main reason for contemplating the "M" classification over the "B", was the restroom count. "M" is much less restrictive in number of fixtures (w.c. in this case) required / occupant. Now you will calculate more occupants for the space, but the fixture requirement / occupant is really low (1/500 vs 1/25.....).

Sounds like it will be able to handle those Weird Wally everything must go sales blow-out end of the year events they have every other month.

 

[gbhammer]

The main reason for contemplating the "M" classification over the "B", was the restroom count. "M" is much less restrictive in number of fixtures (w.c. in this case) required / occupant. Now you will calculate more occupants for the space, but the fixture requirement / occupant is really low (1/500 vs 1/25.....).

For figuring the fixture count only use the office space under the B requirements, use the S1 for the storage/repair areas, and for the showroom space use M on table 2902.1. it says salesrooms right in the description.

 

[Big Mac]

It has become painfully apparent that some will call it whatever they like regardless of what the code states. It would be extremely difficult to call the vehicle showroom anything other than a B without very extenuating circumstances.

 

[north star]

= =

"It has become painfully apparent that some will call it whatever they likeregardless of what the code states............It would be extremely difficult

to call the vehicle showroom anything other than a B without very extenuating

circumstances."

That's purdy funny! = =

 

[Papio Bldg Dept]

It has become painfully apparent that some will call it whatever they like regardless of what the code states. It would be extremely difficult to call the vehicle showroom anything other than a B without very extenuating circumstances.

So you what your saying is, a Harley or Honda Power store is strictly a B occupancy because Chapter 3 says if you have motor-cycles (and a bunch of accessory stuff) instead of bicycles, the duck is a B? I usually see them split down the middle (half showroom/half merchandise), and that duck walks more like an M most days.

 

[Big Mac]

Not at all. What I'm saying is that the original poster identified it as a auto dealership, which is specifically noted as a Use Group B. Some have decided that if a Group M occupancy might apply to a portion of a motorcycle dealership, then it should also be used for an automoble dealership. In my estimation, that doesn't even pass the straight face test.

 

[sooneraia]

Great information, appreciate all the response's. Covered awnings / canopies etc. attached to the building (to park new cars under) are also considered in the fire area - correct. I can't locate the code section that stated this. Thanks in advance.

 

[sooneraia]

I may have spoken too soon, the definitions, Chapter 9 state - FIRE AREA. The aggregate floor area enclosed and bounded by fire walls, fire barriers, exterior walls or horizontal assemblies of a building. Areas of the building not provided with surrounding walls shall be included in the fire area if such areas are included within the horizontal projection of the roof or floor next above. So, if the main building roof parapet is 25' high and we have a attached covered awning which is lower than that (14') that projects out 10' from the exterior wall, we would not have to include it in figuring fire area. Correct?

 

[sooneraia]

OK, I guess I am thick here. I see the merits of this section:707.3.9 Fire areas. The fire barriers or horizontal assemblies, or both, separating a single occupancy into different fire areas shall have a fire-resistance rating of not less than that indicated in Table 707.3.9. The fire barriers or horizontal assemblies, or both, separating fire areas of mixed occupancies shall have a fire-resistance rating of not less than the highest value indicated in Table 707.3.9 for the occupancies under consideration. To me, that requires a three hour separation if I am separating a "single" occupancy, ie. S-1 only.

Why can't we use this section? 707.3.8 Separated occupancies. Where the provisions of Section 508.4 are applicable, the fire barrier separating mixed occupancies shall have a fire-resistance rating of not less than that indicated in Table 508.4 based on the occupancies being separated. Since this building has separate or mixed occupancies, S-1 and B, and Table 508.4 indicates "no separation required".

 

[RLGA]

You can, but only for purposes of allowable area. For establishing fire areas used to determine fire protection requirements, the other section is required.

 

[Big Mac]

Typically the construction requirements for fire-barrier is different than the construction requirements for occupancy separations.