• 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

defining the 'work area'

Status
Not open for further replies.
brudgers,

You have made your point, get a little more civil please or drop it. The two of you are not in the same mind set, Mr. Softy is working to understand this. Be constructive or just set back and watch. You could say the same things in a better way.

Why try and drive off people that want to learn, you know the old more flies with honey than vinegar.
 
Mr. Softy, allow me to congratulate you on remaining professional throughout the incessant and boorish attacks by brudgers. Kind of like an irritating little yap dog snapping at your heels, no?

Mr Softy said:
here are two questions -Project - there are two adjacent 10x10 rooms. the wall between the two is being moved 2 feet, to create an 8x10 room and a 12x10 room.

does the project qualify as Level 2? Yes or No

Is the work area -

a 200 Sq ft, the combined area of the two reconfigured spaces.

b. 20 sq ft. the area the wall was moved

c. 5 sq ft the area of the wall (6"x 10')
Click to expand...
 
texas transplant said:
brudgers, Be constructive or just set back and watch.
Click to expand...
Again, that would be a level of alteration that is simply not attainable. Clearly built into his psyche; clearly "little man syndrome".
 
Mr Softy said:
here are two questions -Project - there are two adjacent 10x10 rooms. the wall between the two is being moved 2 feet, to create an 8x10 room and a 12x10 room.

does the project qualify as Level 2? Yes or No

Is the work area -

a 200 Sq ft, the combined area of the two reconfigured spaces.

b. 20 sq ft. the area the wall was moved

c. 5 sq ft the area of the wall (6"x 10')
Click to expand...
The work area is as shown by the design professional.

By definition.

And despite your wishing the world was full of rainbows and unicorns.
 
jar546 said:
Adding a receptacle triggers level 2. Smoke that.
Click to expand...
whoa.jpg
 
Yeah, my brain's about fried...

I'm starting to like Chapter 3. As far as I can tell you make sure the new work complies with IBC and as long as the existing isn't less conforming then you're good to go. And then check IFC for fire protection, etc...am I wrong dude?

SECTION 303

ALTERATIONS

303.1 General. Except as provided by Section 301.2 or this

section, alterations to any building or structure shall comply

with the requirements of the International Building Code for

new construction. Alterations shall be such that the existing

building or structure is no less conforming to the provisions of

the International Building Code than the existing building or

structure was prior to the alteration.
 
here are two questions -

Project - there are two adjacent 10x10 rooms. the wall between the two is being moved 2 feet, to create an 8x10 room and a 12x10 room.

does the project qualify as Level 2? Yes or No

Yes if the designer chooses to use the Work Area Compliance method. No if he chooses to use one of the other 2 methods.

Is the work area -

a 200 Sq ft, the combined area of the two reconfigured spaces.

b. 20 sq ft. the area the wall was moved

I

would agree only 20 sq ft of the space has been reconfigured

c. 5 sq ft the area of the wall (6"x 10')

The Alteration method does not automatically require compliance with all the requirements of Chapter 7

Use Jars coment for example "Adding a receptacle triggers level 2" It only triggers the requirements found in Section 708 and nothing else.
 
Brudgers,

Behave. Don't make inciteful accusations of others like claims of being a criminal. If it continues and degrades, the thread may have to be locked.
 
A building official can make an interpretation of the code which can become BD policy without every codifying it; that's exactly the the Board of appeals is for: the code official misinterpretated the code... not to get a waiver of the code.
 
The entire room(s) where walls are either moved or removed would constitute the 'work area'. The rooms are the 'altered spaces' - be it by getting bigger or smaller.

As far as the mystical thresholds? Ask yourself this... Is/will the building be less safe after the project than before?

How was the space used/occupied prior to the renovation versus after? Is the level of activity increasing? The hazard?

Codes are, necessarily, written for broad generalizations. Whatever is written one can always devise a 'spoiler' - a scenario that seems to defy logic or impose an unreasonable burden. That's not a bad Code issue, it's an extreme example issue. There are many things in the Codes that I don't fully agree with, but as Dwaynne 'The Rock' Johnson would say... "IT DOESN"T MATTER WHAT YOU THINK!!!". Some days all you can do is suck it up and live with it. Well, that and write a Code Change Proposal for ICC and your State Code writers...
 
At this point, there is another thread that can be used to debate the complaint about the posts. I am going to clean this thread up by moving some of the posts to that new thread in an attempt to keep this thread on topic.

This has been a great thread for Existing Buildings and I think that we can all learn from it and see the difference of opinions..

Back on topic!!!

:eek:topic
 
Let's look at percentages another way.

If a room is 10' x 10' with 10' high ceilings, the actual square footage of the room when you combine the walls, ceiling & floor is 600 square feet.

When you move one of the 10' walls, you are moving 100 square feet or 1/6 or 17%

Work area says nothing about floor area.
 
This has been a very interesting and educational thread and I to would like to see it keep going

Work area says nothing about floor area.
Click to expand...
The work area refers to spaces and a space is within something so I would not agree with your example of applying percentages

Here is my take on the work area definition

WORK AREA. That portion or portions of a building consisting of all reconfigured spaces as indicated on the construction documents. A wall defines a space and is not part of the space. The area of a space must change.

Work area excludes other portions of the building where incidental work entailed by the intended work must be performed A ballroom is being reconfigured and new chandelier light fixtures are installed The chandeliers in the lobby will be changed to match the ballroom. The lobby work would be incidental and not part of the work area.

and portions of the building where work not initially intended by the owner is specifically required by this code. A meeting room was reconfigured and the occupant load went from 40 to 55. Panic hardware is now required on all doors along the egress path. This work is not included in the work area.
 
I like your examples, but why did you answer "b" to softy's question? Do you consider the rest of the two spaces incidental?
 
The building code, in fact all codes, are minimum standards. If a contractor or owner finds a "loophole" to avoid doing something then more power to them. At least they are aware of what is in the code. And just because you may consider it a "loophole" doesn't make it so. It may be a well thought out course of action for the contractor/designer/owner to avoid unnecessary bureaucratic red tape. Regardless, the code is a minimum and I will do my best to help whoever down that minimum path.

In all the previous back and forth banter I see nothing that would resemble a personal attack. Just lively interaction that makes this board unique and special. Anyone who does not like it should probably find a more "politically correct" arena.
 
mtlogcabin said:
This has been a very interesting and educational thread and I to would like to see it keep going
Click to expand...
Thank you...that is a very good description/take on work area, and something I might use in the future. Not sure where I stand on work area versus floor area versus percentage. It is something I need to give some more thought on my vacation to Big Thompson Canyon, where I plan to have no work areas.
 
mtlogcabin said:
This has been a very interesting and educational thread and I to would like to see it keep goingThe work area refers to spaces and a space is within something so I would not agree with your example of applying percentages

Here is my take on the work area definition

WORK AREA. That portion or portions of a building consisting of all reconfigured spaces as indicated on the construction documents. A wall defines a space and is not part of the space. The area of a space must change.

Work area excludes other portions of the building where incidental work entailed by the intended work must be performed A ballroom is being reconfigured and new chandelier light fixtures are installed The chandeliers in the lobby will be changed to match the ballroom. The lobby work would be incidental and not part of the work area.

and portions of the building where work not initially intended by the owner is specifically required by this code. A meeting room was reconfigured and the occupant load went from 40 to 55. Panic hardware is now required on all doors along the egress path. This work is not included in the work area.
Click to expand...
Agree with your post and opinion.
 
In response to Ewenme's post

I will simply state a quote from Chapter 6 (602.5) of the unmodified IBC 2006 (I think the 2009 is still the same in this regard).

(that includes Type V-A and V-B. A means sprinklered or something to that extent and B means non-sprinklered)

602.5 Type V. Type V construction is that type of construction in which the structural elements, exterior walls and interior walls are of any materials permitted by this code.

Wood light frame construction would be under this section. Such as a typical light wood frame Ranch style house.

Type IV is for Heavy Timber

Type III is for buildings that are made of non-combustable exterior walls but the interior maybe of light wood frame construction. Such as a building with concrete of brick exterior but made of light wood or aluminum/steel interior walls and floors. Some cases of heavier steel frame or Timber Frame. This typically includes alot of school buildings in the 1920s that had wood floors and interior walls and roof but the exterior is concrete or masonry or similarly non-combustable construction (typically of fire rating of 3 hours or greater).

Type I & II are for buildings that are made of non-combustable construction entirely throughout. CMU and concrete interior walls, Concrete/CMU exterior walls and pre-stressed concrete roof and such would be a good example.

States may modify this to however they decide.

Light wood frame construction can almost never be really a Type I or II or a type IV. It maybe a Type III if the exterior walls are like brick or concrete (not brick veneer skin over wood stud frame). That is what the code says. I am not quoting it all. Just read Chapter 6.
 
Excuse the post above... it was meant for another thread in the commercial building codes section.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top