• 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.

Current use vs. future use thoughts?

Joe.B said:
The avenue I found for approval is a mixed occupancy building with a 2-hour separation, per 508. Based on what was submitted that's how I can approve it. I think it does a disservice to any future owners, but I can't really justify asking them to change their design based on a "what-if." It is what it is.
Click to expand...
Mixed Occupancy woul;d imply 2 seperate uses, and NOT an attached, Large Garage for a SMALL Home.

Sounds like you are endorsing the notion of a Business and Residence. Is that allowed under your Zoning Rules?
 
Joe.B said:
The avenue I found for approval is a mixed occupancy building with a 2-hour separation, per 508. Based on what was submitted that's how I can approve it. I think it does a disservice to any future owners, but I can't really justify asking them to change their design based on a "what-if." It is what it is.
Click to expand...
Joe, if you would like to "Kick this around" call me 267 784 2401
 
Thanks I appreciate the feedback. I'm reviewing as submitted, and they've already gone through design review so planning has allowed this to move forward. They submitted using CBC (IBC) and the only way I can see to approve it is two separate uses, which it is. The residential unit is "attached" but it is not auxiliary to the shop. 2-hour separation. Done, I'm not concerned about it anymore code wise based on how it was submitted. I brought it here for discussion on the nature of permitting things in this way, meaning how it is being presented vs. the implications to future owners. But I'm not really getting that kind of discussion here, so I think I'll let it lie.
 
Be easy if IRC, just need 5/8 on the garage side here and we don't make all A B & B's change to IBC either. But Cali....
 
Yup, this designer in particular submits everything using CBC. It caused a problem when they submitted an ADU with no sprinklers. My correction was "requires sprinklers" and they cited the residential exceptions (all CA stuff) I I simply responded that if they want to use the CRC exemptions they would need to resubmit using CRC codes. Can't pick and choose. They still submit projects that could be CRC with all CBC codes. I shrug and review as submitted.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top