• 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.

Mixed use

Sifu

SAWHORSE
Joined
Sep 3, 2011
Messages
3,391
I have a large mixed use, separated building. Within it, I have an assembly area with business use offices within it. Can I have an accessory occupancy B, within the main assembly area without separation if it is under 10% of the area of the assembly area? BUT, if the offices are larger than 10% then they would need to be separated?
 
Section 508 is an area many infrequent code users do not fully comprehend and use to their advantage. The section is very flexible in that Section 508.1 states within the last sentence that the building must comply with "Section 508.2 508.3 or 508.4, or a combination of these sections."

That bold part is something that many code users do not take advantage of, albeit because it requires a little more effort and analysis. Therefore, you can have separated occupancies and accessory occupancies. As an accessory occupancy, the 10% floor area limitation is still measured against the entire floor area for that story and not the separated area within which it is located. However, the Group B occupancy would be included as part of the main occupancy area. So, if the Group A occupancy is the main occupancy, the floor area for the Group A occupancy would include the floor area for the Group B accessory occupancy and would be a part of the Group A occupancy ratio when calculating separated occupancies for the rest of the building.

This situation can also be considered a combination of separated and nonseparated occupancies (still acceptable by Section 508.1). Essentially, the Group A and Group B occupancies are grouped together as "nonseparated" occupancies. That grouping is based on the most restrictive occupancy--Group A. Thus, the grouping is considered a Group A occupancy for calculating ratios per the requirements for separated occupancies for the rest of the building.

There are many ways to play this game, but it does take a bit of creativity and some time to evaluate each possible scenario to determine the most advantageous outcome.
 
I knew I could use a mixture of the strategies, (pretty sure it was one of your papers or book that helped me understand). In this case the main occupancy is R1, with R1 and A3, A2, B & S1 occupancies scattered around on the first floor, R1 and A2 & S1 on the second floor, and mostly R1 on floors 3 and 4 with some S-1. They chose separated, though none of their allowable areas are exceeded so I am not sure why...though I suspect they were trying to get around the aggregate sum of allowable areas by using separated to get the sum up to 4 (you also helped in my other post concerning this), but I think this may not work due to the use of the 13 system. The sum of their accessory occupancies exceeds the 10% on floors 1 & 2.

If I could further impose on your expertise...

I am combining my other thread about which section of code prevails with this one as they are related. In that thread I asked about whether fire partitions (from 420.2 & 1020.1) or fire barriers (from 508.4.4.1) prevails. Maybe a sketch of the situation will help explain y questions. If I use 420.2 & 1020.1 then the fire partitions at the meeting rooms and fitness room are permitted, but the separated strategy would require fire barriers since they exceed 10% (along with the other scattered areas). Seems like most restrictive would prevail but I am tied in knots over this one so I'm just not sure.

1657133145433.png
 
Back
Top