• 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

Occ. Load of Residential Terrace?

eyan50495

eyan50495

Registered User
Joined
May 18, 2020
Messages
71
Location
Locust Valley, NY
NYS IBC 2018: R-2 Multifamily Apartment Building.

So the principal at my firm keeps saying that the a recreational residential roof terrace cannot be greater than 750 SF without 2 means of egress. Looking at IBC I can only get this 750 number if I classify the terrace as an Assembly.

I also see that it can be further determined by the AHJ per 1004.7.

Typically I've classified the terrace as R-2 as well with a 200 GSF OL so I never exceeded the max. occ. load for 1 means of egress (1006.2.1).

Is the answer that the AHJ should determine the OL?

1633441069073.png
1633441139289.png
 
If the occupied roof terrace is community space and is not associated with a dwelling unit, then it should be considered an assembly area, even if the roof terrace can only be used by residents. The concern here is the number of occupants and not its association with a residential occupancy. For all intents and purposes, a roof terrace is an assembly area. If the assembly area is kept at 750 sq. ft. or less, it can be classified as part of the main occupancy (Group R-2 in this case) or as a Group B; otherwise, it must be classified as a Group A.
 
I have seen the Los Angeles Building Department approve a 1500+ SF roof deck separated into multiple 750 SF roof decks so that it would not get classified as an "A" occupancy. The separation is typically a bunch of raised planters / raised skylights with a maximum 4' walkway between them.

1633454270927.png

1633454146543.png
 
Last edited:
Yikes said:
I have seen the Los Angeles Building Department approve a 1500+ SF roof deck separated into multiple 750 SF roof decks so that it would not get classified as an "A" occupancy. The separation is typically a bunch of raised planters / raised skylights with a maximum 4' walkway between them.

View attachment 8269

View attachment 8268
Click to expand...
Wow. But wouldn't each one need its own means of egress? And wouldn't they all converge? Surprised something like this would get away!
 
eyan50495 said:
Wow. But wouldn't each one need its own means of egress? And wouldn't they all converge? Surprised something like this would get away!
Click to expand...
My guess is that it was an occupancy group classification issue rather than an occupant load issue. A Group A occupancy may not have been permitted at that height based on the construction type of the building. Thus, they could be classified as Group B which would allow a higher level location.

Each would need its own means of egress, but the roof level would still need two means of egress based on the combined occupant load for the two rooftop areas. One area could egress through the other to reach that area's exit for the second means of egress.
 
RLGA said:
My guess is that it was an occupancy group classification issue rather than an occupant load issue. A Group A occupancy may not have been permitted at that height based on the construction type of the building. Thus, they could be classified as Group B which would allow a higher level location.

Each would need its own means of egress, but the roof level would still need two means of egress based on the combined occupant load for the two rooftop areas. One area could egress through the other to reach that area's exit for the second means of egress.
Click to expand...
That's exactly what it is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top