Just asking

[Simonsays]

Remodeling the basement of a commercial office building and constructing a 965 square-foot classroom/conference room. Architect is claiming not more than 49 occupants using table and chair occupancy factor. (Ha - calculates to more than 61.) Building is not sprinkled and this classroom/ conference room is not on the level of exit discharge. If I accept their claim of 49 occupants then the A-3 space could be considered as a B occupancy and therefore would not require sprinklers. Thoughts?

 

[JPohling]

not enough information. Construction type, how many exits from the basement, floor plate size, adjacent spaces and uses. The only way your 965 sf room can be considered a B is if it were to be 735 SF or less. 49x15= 735 SF

 

[RLGA]

@Simonsays, I assume you are either the building official or representing the building official. If so, the exception to Section 1004.5 allows the building official to permit an occupant load less than calculated. It is your call based on the level of risk you are willing to assume.

As @JPohling stated, there really is not enough information to determine the level of risk. Is the conference room open to anybody in the building or just to a specific tenant? Is this room used for training the public or employees who work within the building? Will they post the maximum occupant load (only required for assembly occupancies, but since they should be an assembly occupancy, they should do this anyway as a condition of acceptance)?

 

[jar546]

Personally, I would never utilize 1004.5 to reduce the occupancy in the basement of a non-sprinklered building intended for assembly use.

 

[steveray]

Of course....if the building is mixed use nonseparated, one could possibly argue that the basement is already A3.....

 

[Tim Mailloux]

Remodeling the basement of a commercial office building and constructing a 965 square-foot classroom/conference room. Architect is claiming not more than 49 occupants using table and chair occupancy factor. (Ha - calculates to more than 61.) Building is not sprinkled and this classroom/ conference room is not on the level of exit discharge. If I accept their claim of 49 occupants then the A-3 space could be considered as a B occupancy and therefore would not require sprinklers. Thoughts?

any chance the architect is calculating the occupant load of the space as a classrom / training room and using the 1 per 20 classroom occupant load factor?

 

[jar546]

Remodeling the basement of a commercial office building and constructing a 965 square-foot classroom/conference room. Architect is claiming not more than 49 occupants using table and chair occupancy factor. (Ha - calculates to more than 61.) Building is not sprinkled and this classroom/ conference room is not on the level of exit discharge. If I accept their claim of 49 occupants then the A-3 space could be considered as a B occupancy and therefore would not require sprinklers. Thoughts?

What percentage of the footprint of the building is the 965 square feet?

 

[RLGA]

any chance the architect is calculating the occupant load of the space as a classrom / training room and using the 1 per 20 classroom occupant load factor?

This is a valid point. If it is a classroom, then the 20sf/occupant can be used and the occupant load would be under 50. I suspect it is for adult education, so Group B would then be appropriate.

 

[jar546]

Also, in addition to my percentage of square feet of the building, what is the current occupancy classification of the basement?

 

[Genduct]

not enough information. Construction type, how many exits from the basement, floor plate size, adjacent spaces and uses. The only way your 965 sf room can be considered a B is if it were to be 735 SF or less. 49x15= 735 SF

735 net or gross?
I think the next thoughtful post covers where the buck stops!

 

[Simonsays]

Construction type 5B, basement area 5,010 square feet, 3 exits out of basement level via stairs, current occupancy of basement is business.

 

[Yikes]

Personally, I would never utilize 1004.5 to reduce the occupancy in the basement of a non-sprinklered building intended for assembly use.

I've done several membership gym / fitness clubs (similar to 24-Hour Fitness) that have a basketball court for pickup games. On a practical basis, the maximum # of people in there at any one time is about 20 (either 4 teams playing half-court, or 2 teams full-court + 2 teams waiting for their turn.).
But if you look at IBC 303.4 "gymnasium - without fixed seating", it is an A-3 assembly occupancy. It appears the code is anticipating the gym to function as a multipurpose / school assembly, and vastly overstates the real use of the facility.

Example:
A single full-size court with 5' for out-of-bounds is about 6,030 SF.
IBC Table 1004.5 Assembly without fixed seats = 6,030 / 7 = 862 occupants!

Well, maybe let's call it "exercise" in T-1004.5:
6,030 / 50 = 121 occupants - - still way over the "real life" occupant load.

Virtually every plan checker / building official has allowed a reduced design / posted occupant load in these scenarios.

When the code grants discretion to the building official, it's appropriate to exercise caution, but I'd encourage all of us not to categorically dismiss all assembly reduction requests.

 

[jar546]

I've done several membership gym / fitness clubs (similar to 24-Hour Fitness) that have a basketball court for pickup games. On a practical basis, the maximum # of people in there at any one time is about 20 (either 4 teams playing half-court, or 2 teams full-court + 2 teams waiting for their turn.).
But if you look at IBC 303.4 "gymnasium - without fixed seating", it is an A-3 assembly occupancy. It appears the code is anticipating the gym to function as a multipurpose / school assembly, and vastly overstates the real use of the facility.

Example:
A single full-size court with 5' for out-of-bounds is about 6,030 SF.
IBC Table 1004.5 Assembly without fixed seats = 6,030 / 7 = 862 occupants!

Well, maybe let's call it "exercise" in T-1004.5:
6,030 / 50 = 121 occupants - - still way over the "real life" occupant load.

Virtually every plan checker / building official has allowed a reduced design / posted occupant load in these scenarios.

When the code grants discretion to the building official, it's appropriate to exercise caution, but I'd encourage all of us not to categorically dismiss all assembly reduction requests.

I have utilized 1004.5 many times, but I would never, ever do so in this application. Too risky for all the wrong reasons. Profit is not my problem.

 

[Genduct]

I've done several membership gym / fitness clubs (similar to 24-Hour Fitness) that have a basketball court for pickup games. On a practical basis, the maximum # of people in there at any one time is about 20 (either 4 teams playing half-court, or 2 teams full-court + 2 teams waiting for their turn.).
But if you look at IBC 303.4 "gymnasium - without fixed seating", it is an A-3 assembly occupancy. It appears the code is anticipating the gym to function as a multipurpose / school assembly, and vastly overstates the real use of the facility.

Example:
A single full-size court with 5' for out-of-bounds is about 6,030 SF.
IBC Table 1004.5 Assembly without fixed seats = 6,030 / 7 = 862 occupants!

Well, maybe let's call it "exercise" in T-1004.5:
6,030 / 50 = 121 occupants - - still way over the "real life" occupant load.

Virtually every plan checker / building official has allowed a reduced design / posted occupant load in these scenarios.

When the code grants discretion to the building official, it's appropriate to exercise caution, but I'd encourage all of us not to categorically dismiss all assembly reduction requests.

I have to admire your analysis and also suspect that it is not just you but also your Department that allows this kind of accommodation.
May I ask, was a legal occupancy sign also required to remind those using the space, what the expectation is?

 

[Yikes]

I have to admire your analysis and also suspect that it is not just you but also your Department that allows this kind of accommodation.
May I ask, was a legal occupancy sign also required to remind those using the space, what the expectation is?

Yes, we always posted the maximum (reduced) occupancy load. In a fitness club, it is easily enforced, as the basketball court is monitored by the front desk.

 

[SCBO1]

Any accessibilty issues with this basement remodel. is the same use upstairs?