• 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.

CondoHotels R1 or R2

What exactly are you referring to?

Are you referring to timeshares and short-term rentals that are structured as condominiums for ownership purposes?
 
IBC,
R-group.
R1 if more than 10 occupants (Transient: Occupancy of a dwelling unit or sleeping unit for not more than 30 days)
R2 containing sleeping units where the occupants are primarily permanent. (Condo)
 
classicT said:
What exactly are you referring to?

Are you referring to timeshares and short-term rentals that are structured as condominiums for ownership purposes?
Click to expand...
CondoHotels- They are legally condos but operate as hotels, then there are timeshares
SCBO1 said:
IBC,
R-group.
R1 if more than 10 occupants (Transient: Occupancy of a dwelling unit or sleeping unit for not more than 30 days)
R2 containing sleeping units where the occupants are primarily permanent. (Condo)
Click to expand...
Thank you
 
classicT said:
Condo's do not exist as it relates to the IBC. Condominium is a term that relates to the ownership of a building.

If it is short term, transient guests, then it is a Group R-1.
Click to expand...
I served as a project management consultant for a developer doing a hotel with the condominium ownership structure, architect’s code summary document identified the occupancy as R-1, building department had no problems with that.
 
walker.t said:
building department had no problems with that.
Click to expand...
I forgot to mention that the plans reviewer was fully aware of the condominium ownership structure as was the planner who presented the project to the planning board, none of the officials seemed to think twice about it.
 
walker.t said:
I forgot to mention that the plans reviewer was fully aware of the condominium ownership structure as was the planner who presented the project to the planning board, none of the officials seemed to think twice about it.
Click to expand...

They should not have thought twice about it, because the form of ownership is not addressed by the building code.
 
Yankee Chronicler said:
They should not have thought twice about it, because the form of ownership is not addressed by the building code.
Click to expand...
Agreed. May be impacted by zoning/planning codes, but not building codes.

Condos are not limited to residential uses either - I've had a warehouse building split into condos. Allowed for contractors, small businesses, etc. to have a small office/storefront and warehouse space. Worked quite well, very popular as it allowed for owning the space and not renting.
 
I've wondered before, can't it be both?

Structures shall be classified into one or more of the occupancy groups specified in this section based on the nature of the hazards and risks to building occupants generally associated with the intended purpose of the building or structure. An area, room or space that is intended to be occupied at different times for different purposes shall comply with all applicable requirements associated with such potential multipurpose.

I'd call it both, and make sure it meets the requirements of both.
 
Condo is about underlying land and property ownership. It does not compel any conclusions about life safety features associated with the building code.

The R1/R2 distinction for purposes of life safety is primarily about duration of stay, and also implies to some extent the presence of cooking facilities associated with R2 and the 202 definition of dwelling units.

There are also accessibility scoping implications for condos vs. apartments in the Fair Housing Act.
 
Yankee Chronicler said:
They should not have thought twice about it, because the form of ownership is not addressed by the building code.
Click to expand...
Most definitely. I don’t know why the project owner mentioned the condominium structure to the building officials, maybe just so if someone complained down the line he could say that he made a full disclosure.

A condominium arrangement can also be done long after the project is built. Same developer once owned a historic building with apartments he rented. Eventually he wanted to sell the building but instead of trying to sell the entire building as a whole he set up each of the apartments as a condo, I assume because those would be easier to sell.
 
Once dealt with a bank attached to other units in a strip mall, the bank had to setup a condo because of banking laws. When they bought the strip mall they were instructed to do it that way.

So condo had several different code occupancies.
 
If a R2 condo owner rents a unit in a large apartment building short term, or just one bedroom in the condo, is it required to go through a change of occupancy to R1 just for the one condo or one bedroom?
 
Mr. Inspector said:
If a R2 condo owner rents a unit in a large apartment building short term, or just one bedroom in the condo, is it required to go through a change of occupancy to R1 just for the one condo or one bedroom?
Click to expand...
I don’t know the answer to your question for sure but here are a couple of thoughts:

1. There may be something in the covenants that prohibit short-term rentals. That wouldn’t involve the building department, but there might be constraints in place to prevent the problem from ever coming up.
2. I wonder if there might be a zoning restriction in some locations regarding this. I’ve heard of zoning restrictions on vacation rentals in residential districts, maybe such short term rentals would be considered something similar to vacation rentals.

But I don’t think short-term rentals would trigger a change in use if they are an exception to the usual operation of the R-2 occupancy. When the short term rentals increase in frequency to the point that the R-2 occupancy is functioning as an R-1, and the building department and zoning department find out about it, I would think they would have grounds to do something about it.
 
You know there are extended stay motels that you can stay in for months. Does that change the occupancy of that hotel room from an R-1 to an R-2?
Is it really a concern in sprinklered buildings as far as life safety is concerned.
 
Might want to see 2021 IBC section 420, it addresses some questions regarding sprinklers in Group R occupancies.

See Table 506.2, for allowable area per type of construction, R1 and R2 are the same regarding area in all types of construction.
 
Joe.B said:
I've wondered before, can't it be both?

Structures shall be classified into one or more of the occupancy groups specified in this section based on the nature of the hazards and risks to building occupants generally associated with the intended purpose of the building or structure. An area, room or space that is intended to be occupied at different times for different purposes shall comply with all applicable requirements associated with such potential multipurpose.

I'd call it both, and make sure it meets the requirements of both.
Click to expand...
 
Section 310.2 doesn’t mention dwelling units in R-1, so it seems like that makes them R-2. Can dwelling units be R-1?

If I understand the term correctly (had to look it up), a condotel has a front desk, hotel staff, housekeeping, etc. If it’s a central operation using the residences as inventory that is going to be an important ADA issue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top