• 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

California Occupant Load issue

J

JPohling

Sawhorse
Joined
Aug 16, 2011
Messages
1,589
Location
San Diego
The 2019 CBC Table 1004.5 has revised the occupant load for Business areas to 1 per 150SF. they have introduced the concentrated business use at 1 per 50SF for call centers, etc. We have recently been updating our exiting plans and calculations based upon this.

We just received comments back from the State Fire Marshal that the 2019 CFC has not changed their Table 1004.5 and they are still showing 1 per 100SF for this occupant load.

All I can say is WTF
 
Thought I would bring this up again. 2019 CBC indicates occupant load factor for business areas at 1/150 gross. 2019 CFC indicates the occupant load factor for business areas as 1/100 gross. I checked the 2021 IFC and they are indicating 1/150 gross. looks to me like the CFC is incorrect. What are your thoughts.
 
Our local fire marshal frequently states that "the building code is used for construction, the fire code is used for things that are already built."
 
This fire marshal is saying that the California Building Code is in error and the fire code is correct.
 
So, you build it for the occupancy rate in the building code and it passes, but it fails as soon as it is open to the public and the fire code applies.

Sounds like someone is throwing a tantrum and the adults need to get involved.
 
JPohling said:
This fire marshal is saying that the California Building Code is in error and the fire code is correct.
Click to expand...

Welcome to California

I would say “ the stricter of any code applies”

The trouble with not having same code brand, or editions.
 
In the 2019 CBC Chapter 10 "Matrix Adoption Table", the State Fire Marshal (SFM) adopted CBC Chapter 10 and did not list 1004.5 as an amendment, so the occupant load factors in CBC Table 1004.5 are already formally adopted by the SFM.

Therefore, IMO it's not a matter of Fire Code vs. Building Code, and the stricter applies; instead, it's an inherent conflict between SFM's own adoption of Building Code vs. SFM's own adoption of Fire Code.
The SFM should be required to issue a formal, written interpretation.

1621010865059.png
 
Last edited:
tmurray said:
So, you build it for the occupancy rate in the building code and it passes, but it fails as soon as it is open to the public and the fire code applies.

Sounds like someone is throwing a tantrum and the adults need to get involved.
Click to expand...
I think it's more along the lines that new construction has to follow the current CBC, whereas all of the existing buildings out there are not required to change their existing conditions. When our fire marshal inspects (or examines plans for) new construction he always references the CBC. The only time he uses CFC is during enforcement issues of existing buildings. If a new building was constructed and approved under CBC the FD is not going to open an enforcement case and say it's "non-compliant." Down the road if there was an issue and someone said it's in violation of CFC they would be able to pull out their approved plans and there completed inspection record and show they were compliant with CBC. I doubt it would ever be an issue, but who knows how this could pop up, could be a problem down the road.
 
Joe.B said:
I think it's more along the lines that new construction has to follow the current CBC, whereas all of the existing buildings out there are not required to change their existing conditions. When our fire marshal inspects (or examines plans for) new construction he always references the CBC. The only time he uses CFC is during enforcement issues of existing buildings. If a new building was constructed and approved under CBC the FD is not going to open an enforcement case and say it's "non-compliant." Down the road if there was an issue and someone said it's in violation of CFC they would be able to pull out their approved plans and there completed inspection record and show they were compliant with CBC. I doubt it would ever be an issue, but who knows how this could pop up, could be a problem down the road.
Click to expand...
It sounds like this is an issue for the OP already.

The building code is less restrictive at 1 person per 150 sq. ft. than the fire code's 1 person per 100 sq. ft., so I build a building compliant with the building code. The day I open it, the fire code now applies and the occupant load goes up by 50%.
 
This has not been an issue as yet as the occupant load at 100 did not cause us any heartache on this current project, but it will. I cannot believe this is the first time this has been brought up. Is there any CA fire marshals here?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top