tmurray
SAWHORSE
I might just need to vent from a difficult designer I just dealt with, but I was wondering if anyone had any tricks on ending meetings that are just not going anywhere.
I have a situation where we have a building that has a store and will also soon house the national headquarters for that chain of stores. The designer was arguing that since both are owner by the same person, there is only one major occupancy. In the building code in Canada, the major occupancy of a suite is the major use of the area and includes other occupancies that are critical to the operation of the major occupancy. For example the store manager's office is critical to the operation of the store, so it is part of the store. The national headquarters is not critical to the operation of the store, so it is a second occupancy and must be separated by a fire separation. There is no reference to tenancy or ownership in the code. We argued about this for 45 minutes, with him saying the same thing over and over in different ways. At the end I was so frustrated, I simply apologized for appearing frustrated and told him unless he had other evidence to present that that the occupancies must be separated.
My questions is do any of you have any tips or tricks on how you end this kind of a meeting?
I just get so frustrated with the waste of time and tax payer money.
Thanks everyone
I have a situation where we have a building that has a store and will also soon house the national headquarters for that chain of stores. The designer was arguing that since both are owner by the same person, there is only one major occupancy. In the building code in Canada, the major occupancy of a suite is the major use of the area and includes other occupancies that are critical to the operation of the major occupancy. For example the store manager's office is critical to the operation of the store, so it is part of the store. The national headquarters is not critical to the operation of the store, so it is a second occupancy and must be separated by a fire separation. There is no reference to tenancy or ownership in the code. We argued about this for 45 minutes, with him saying the same thing over and over in different ways. At the end I was so frustrated, I simply apologized for appearing frustrated and told him unless he had other evidence to present that that the occupancies must be separated.
My questions is do any of you have any tips or tricks on how you end this kind of a meeting?
I just get so frustrated with the waste of time and tax payer money.
Thanks everyone