Does a patio area need to be part of the occupant load calc?

[SCBO1]

Existing restaurant A-2, with under 100 OL adds a seasonal covered patio seating area adding 32 seats at grade open three sides outside it's door. Now OL is 132, its over 100 requiring a sprinkler system. The 32 occupants could exit through a gate or hop the fence to freedom. Should the 32 seats be added to the occupant load or is there any exemption that I've over looked?

Change in code:

IBC2003 903.2.1.2 Group A-2 (if over 300 occupants require sprinkler)

IBC2006 903.2.1.2 Group A-2 (if over 100 occupants require sprinkler)

 

[mark handler]

No the patio occupants are not, building occupants.

Do the building occupants exit through the patio?

If they do the building occupants need to be added to the patio occupants in determining the gate width. And the gate may need panic hardware if the gate load is high enough.

 

[mtlogcabin]

No the patio occupant load does not add to the occupant load for sprinkler requirements.

[F] 903.2.1.2 Group A-2.

An automatic sprinkler system shall be provided for Group A-2 occupancies where one of the following conditions exists:

1. The fire area exceeds 5,000 square feet (465 m2);

2. The fire area has an occupant load of 100 or more; or

3. The fire area is located on a floor other than the level of exit discharge.

FIRE AREA. The aggregate floor area enclosed and bounded by fire walls, fire barriers, exterior walls or fire-resistance-rated horizontal assemblies of a building

 

[cda]

I vote that they are building occupants

where are they going to go to the bathroom at???

as far as sprinklers more then likely no, unless they do sometype of enclousure with walls

 

[Gene Boecker]

I'll take the opposite side of the argument as well. If the patio occupants must travel back through the building to egress, then they must be added to the total occupant load. If there can be a case for non-simultaneous occupancy then maybe the number can be reduced. Otherwise the patio PLUS interior building occupants represent the total number to be exposed to the potential threat (assuming egress is back inside). In that case, they must be counted. The number of individuals that must pass through the "fire area" would include the patio.

(Weird! being more conservative that the building officials.)

 

[mtlogcabin]

The patio OL does contribute to the plumbing and egress requirements but not the sprinkler requirements because the fire area OL does not exceed 100. You can have a 200 OL A-2 but if you create different fire areas that do not exceed the 100 OL requirement you do not have to sprinkler the building.

 

[SCBO1]

mtlogcabin,

I tend to agree and that the code uses the term "fire area" definition in sec.702.1 bounded by fire walls or exterior walls, which the patio is bounded by the one exterior block wall from the restaurant and three low fenced sides of the patio area with a gate egress to the parking lot.

 

[SCBO1]

Gene,

Patio occupants do not have to exit back through the restaurant in this case but most of the time do. During a fire they can exit through the gate to the parking area.

 

[texasbo]

Would anyone consider the roofed outdoor area as part of the building area per 502.1?

 

[north star]

& & &

Pcinspector1,

Does the existing A-2 have a sufficient number of functional MOE

[ refer to Section 3410.6.11 ] ?

texasbo,

Yes!

& & &

 

[dbrown]

The IBC 2006 code commentary has an interesting take on this issue, it references the IFC Comittee Interpretation No. 25-05 which states in part that "where no surrounding exterior walls are provided along the perimeter of the building, the building area is used to identify and determine the applicable fire area." Outdoor areas such as pavilions and patios may have no walls, but will have an occupant load and other factors that identify the assembly occupancy as such. If any of the thresholds are reached requiring sprinkler protection, then sprinkler protection must be provided whether there are exterior walls or not.

We have had 2 of these recently and one went for the sprinklers and one did away with the patio area.

 

[mtlogcabin]

Interesting commentary but it does not address this case where you have 2 different fire areas each with an OL of less than 100 and neither one by it self requires sprinklers

 

[north star]

% % %

dbrown,

Welcome to the Codes Forum!

% % %

 

[texasbo]

In reference to mtlogcabins and dbrowns post, I think the real question is, if it's all considered the same building area, then how can you consider the wall between the roofed enclosed area and the roofed unenclosed area an exterior wall? And if it's not an exterior wall, how can you consider them separate fire areas, unless of course the wall was constructed as a fire barrier?

In certain cases, I've looked at certain small and/or temporary, roofed patio areas that are open on 3 sides as "architectural projections", but there are those that would say I'm misapplying the code.

I think the most conservative and correct interpretation would be that referenced by dbrown, and the reason I asked the question in post #9.

 

[SCBO1]

north star,

Yes, three total MOE's from the restaurant, this was a double tenant space on the end of a building. Was set up for a bank drive through that is now proposed as a patio area with the roof above and open on three sides. Punching in the third door for patio access on end wall of building. Good MOE!

Everyones aware of the reduced occupant load from the IBC "03" to the "06" codes, right? 300 OL to 100 OL, big change.

pc1

 

[hlfireinspector]

If the covered pato roof is projection from orginal roof line then it is part of the building and is considered in the fire area. Where do these people use the restrooms, pay the tab? They must use the orginal building for services to this area. How can a area that is serviced by the orginal building not be part of that building? The code does not say that occupant load from outside area is not included in occupancy factor it says that if egress for this area passes through the building exits shall be provided in accordance with the total ocupant load.

2006 International Fire Code

1004.8 Outdoor areas.

Yards, patios, courts and similar outdoor




areas accessible to and usable by the building occupants

shall be provided with means of egress as required by this chapter.

The occupant load of such outdoor areas shall be assigned

by the fire code official in accordance with the anticipated use.

Where outdoor areas are to be used by persons in addition to the

occupants of the building, and the path of egress travel from the

outdoor areas passes through the building, means of egress

requirements for the building shall be based on the sum of the

occupant loads of the building plus the outdoor areas.

Exceptions:

1. Outdoor areas used exclusively for service of the

building need only have one means of egress.

2. Both outdoor areas associated with Group R-3 and

​

individual dwelling units of Group R-2.

 

[Builder Bob]

Best answer, it depends..... What type of roof projection are we talking about? Does the occupants out side "have" to travel back thru the building to exit? What is the owner going to add at a later date to prevent tab hopping?

 

[SCBO1]

hlfireinspector,

1004.8 Outdoor areas.

Where outdoor areas are to be used by persons in addition to the

occupants of the building, and the path of egress travel from the

outdoor areas passes through the building, means of egress

requirements for the building shall be based on the sum of the

occupant loads of the building plus the outdoor areas.

This is not the case, egress path is to leave the building not enter the building.

This part of the code is like a courtyard surrounded by buildings that you would have to egress through a building to get to the parking area or safe area on the other side?

 

[texasbo]

I don't really see what having the patio occupants exit through the building has to do with the building being sprinklered. An A-2 is required to be sprinklered if the OL exceeds 100. Does the OL of this building exceed 100?

Is the covered patio part of the building? In my opinion this is where the real question lies.

 

[mtlogcabin]

An A-2 is required to be sprinklered if the OL exceeds 100.

Only if the OL of the fire area exceeds 100. My thoughts are this has 2 fire areas. 1 inside and 1 outside. The exterior wall does not have to meet the requirements of a fire barrier to comply with the fire area definition (see 706.6) it only has to meet the construction requirements of 704. therfore the OL in either fire area does not exceed 100 no sprinklers required

 

[mueller]

I see the 2009 IBC is not applicable in this situation, but if it were, see the new definition of fire area.

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. [F]

 

[SCBO1]

mtlogcabin,

I'm riding your dirtbike on this one, I agree so far that its a different fire area, not needing a sprinkler system in either area. And that egress is just that, egress not ingress.

pc1

 

[north star]

* * *

Since we are playing "devils advocate"... :razz:

Just suppose that the inside OL is 100, and the outside OL is 100.

What if some of the patrons from outside come inside to use the

facilities and decide it's better inside than outside. They now

stay inside and the inside OL increase by 1 or more. What now?

Who enforces the OL maximum?

or,

there are two sets of patrons being served, some inside and

some outside [ on this faint-see patio area ]. The weather

turns and forces some of the revenue stream indoors. The OL

now increases significantly. What now?

FWIW, this type of business set-up has the very real

potential for OL overloading.

* * *

 

[mark handler]

"devils advocate"...

Just suppose that More people come than allowed by the OL

What if the patrons from inside and outside decide to stay,

What now? Does it change the OL?

Because prople are waiting to get in, Does it change the OL?

No.