• 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.

Occupancy classification of a Unicorn congregate residence

Y

Yikes

SAWHORSE
Joined
Nov 2, 2009
Messages
3,951
Location
Southern California
I can't figure out how to classify a congregate residence per California Building Code 310.

It is a single dwelling unit (mansion-sized, really) with 20 bedrooms for 20+ occupants. The residents have been either homeless or at-risk for homelessness, and the average resident stay is 6 months while they get their life together, so it doesn't meet the CBC 202 definition "transient" which is primarily 30 days or less. The residents pay no rent; this is a not-for-profit ministry, so it's not a boarding house.
The CBC 202 definition of "sleeping unit" says that bedrooms that are part of a dwelling unit are not considered to be "sleeping units".

Looking at CBC 310:
So, how do I classify it?
***
The only other thing I can think of is to call it R-3 anyway even though we have more than 16 occupants, because just by process of elimination maybe I end up with this in CBC 310.4:
Residential Group R-3 occupancies where the occupants are primarily permanent in nature and not classified as Group R-1, R-2, R-2.1, R-2.2, R-3.1, R-4 or I, including:​
 
According to UpCodes version of the California Building Code, your definition of congregate residences is incorrect:

310.3 Residential Group R-2​


Residential Group R-2 occupancies containing sleeping units or more than two dwelling units where the occupants are primarily permanent in nature, including:
Click to expand...

Looks a lot like R-2 to me.
 
Yankee Chronicler said:
According to UpCodes version of the California Building Code, your definition of congregate residences is incorrect:



Looks a lot like R-2 to me.
Click to expand...
I hear you, that's what I thought at first. But I have no sleeping units (according to the definition below) and I only have one dwelling unit on the site, so that disqualifies it from being R-2.

CBC Definitions:
CONGREGATE RESIDENCE. Any building or portion thereof that contains facilities for living, sleeping and sanitation, as required by this code, and may include facilities for eating and cooking, for occupancy by other than a family. A congregate residence may be a shelter, convent, monastery, dormitory, fraternity or sorority house, but does not include jails, hospitals, nursing homes, hotels or lodging houses.

310.3 Residential Group R-2
Residential Group R-2 occupancies containing sleeping units [NO] or more than two dwelling units [NO] where the occupants are primarily permanent in nature...

SLEEPING UNIT. A single unit that provides rooms or spaces for one or more persons, includes permanent provisions for sleeping and can include provisions for living, eating and either sanitation or kitchen facilities but not both. Such rooms and spaces that are also part of a dwelling unit are NOT sleeping units.


DWELLING UNIT. A single unit providing complete, independent living facilities for one or more persons, including permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking and sanitation. [HCD 1-AC] For the purposes of Chapter 11A, a single unit of residence for a family of one or more persons. Examples of dwelling units covered by Chapter 11A include condominiums, an apartment unit within an apartment building, and other types of dwellings in which sleeping accommodations are provided but toileting or cooking facilities are shared by occupants of more than one room or portion of the dwelling. Examples of the latter include dormitory rooms and sleeping accommodations in shelters intended for occupancy as residences for homeless persons
 
Towards the end of 302.1 it says "where a structure is proposed for a use that is not specified in this section, such structure shall be classified in the group that occupancy most nearly resembles..."
 
Yankee Chronicler said:
If there are no sleeping units, how/why is it referred to as a congregate "residence"?
Click to expand...
The definition in post #3 for Congregate Residence says it must contain facilities for sleeping. It does not say those facilities must be called sleeping units. Apparently if the congregate residence is in a R-3 dwelling unit, you can call the facilities for sleeping “bedrooms”, or just “facilities for sleeping”.
 
According to UpCodes a resident is considered permanent once they stay longer than 30 days.

PERMANENT. [DSA-AC] Facilities which, are intended to be used for periods longer than those designated in this code under the definition of "Temporary."

After 30 days they should be familiar with the exits. I believe the main code difference between R-1 & R-2 is the fire alarm system.
 
Yikes said:
Thanks, Joe. Given the limitation in the R-1 definition that the residents must be transient less than 30 days, and these residents are there linger than 30 days, how would R-1 still be the best fit?
Click to expand...
Paul Sweet said:
According to UpCodes a resident is considered permanent once they stay longer than 30 days.

PERMANENT. [DSA-AC] Facilities which, are intended to be used for periods longer than those designated in this code under the definition of "Temporary."

After 30 days they should be familiar with the exits. I believe the main code difference between R-1 & R-2 is the fire alarm system.
Click to expand...
Given that it doesn't neatly fit into one category or the other, 302.1 tells you to pick the one its closest too. Then, as Paul is hinting at, you look at the differences and risk factors. R-1 has a higher safety factor, so I would go there.

Think about this, if you design a building to be primarily short stays (hotel/motel) then you're an R-1. Does that mean people couldn't stay more than 30 days? Some people interpret it that way. In my opinion, that's not a necessary distinction. Designing it for short stays shouldn't preclude longer stays. I would not go the other way though.
 
The weird this is, is some ways an R-3 single dwelling unit is much more robust in terms of the fire alarm system. Why? because it's a public funded housing project, so the entire dwelling is a "communication accessible" unit. That means every bedroom needs a strobe alarm.
 
To me it's a dormitory.

The code says for occupancies that don't fit the standard descriptions, the building official shall determine the occupancy classification. Sounds to me like it's time to sit down with the building official.
 
Yankee Chronicler said:
To me it's a dormitory.

The code says for occupancies that don't fit the standard descriptions, the building official shall determine the occupancy classification. Sounds to me like it's time to sit down with the building official.
Click to expand...
My staff already did this, and the BO said it was R-3. Like you, I did not believe R-3 was correctly at first. But I'm slowly coming around, because only R-3 has the catch-all phrase that tells you to call it R-3 when no other category neatly fits:
1727123779084.png​
R-3 actually makes my life harder. Given that it is both publicly funded and the only dwelling unit on the property, every room (including all 20 bathrooms) must have a fully accessible route. If this were a different category, then the bedrooms would be called "sleeping units" and only 5% would need to be mobility accessible.
 
Yikes said:
R-3 actually makes my life harder. Given that it is both publicly funded and the only dwelling unit on the property, every room (including all 20 bathrooms) must have a fully accessible route. If this were a different category, then the bedrooms would be called "sleeping units" and only 5% would need to be mobility accessible.
Click to expand...
You hit the nail on the head right there. This is why I suggested R-1. If your project is designed to R-1 standards it will cover all of your bases.
 
Yikes said:
My staff already did this, and the BO said it was R-3. Like you, I did not believe R-3 was correctly at first. But I'm slowly coming around, because only R-3 has the catch-all phrase that tells you to call it R-3 when no other category neatly fits:
​
R-3 actually makes my life harder. Given that it is both publicly funded and the only dwelling unit on the property, every room (including all 20 bathrooms) must have a fully accessible route. If this were a different category, then the bedrooms would be called "sleeping units" and only 5% would need to be mobility accessible.
Click to expand...

Why isn't it a dormitory? (Which is R-2).

[BG] DORMITORY. A space in a building where group
sleeping accommodations are provided in one room, or in a
series of closely associated rooms, for persons not members of
the same family group, under joint occupancy and single
management, as in college dormitories or fraternity houses.
Click to expand...
 
Joe B, it can't be R-1 because that is only for transient occupancies, which is a stay of 30 days or less. These residents will actually be there 6 months, so it's permanent housing.
Residential Group R-1 occupancies containing sleeping units where the occupants are primarily transient in nature, including:​
See also below regarding sleeping units.

Yankee Chronicler, it can't be R-2 because there is no sleeping unit, and also because there is only one dwelling unit on the whole site. That means the rooms inside don't qualify as sleeping units.
Residential Group R-2 occupancies containing sleeping units or more than two dwelling units where the occupants are primarily permanent in nature​

SLEEPING UNIT. A single unit that provides rooms or spaces for one or more persons, includes permanent provisions for sleeping and can include provisions for living, eating and either sanitation or kitchen facilities but not both. Such rooms and spaces that are also part of a dwelling unit are not sleeping units.​
 
Yikes said:
Joe B, it can't be R-1 because that is only for transient occupancies, which is a stay of 30 days or less. These residents will actually be there 6 months, so it's permanent housing.
Residential Group R-1 occupancies containing sleeping units where the occupants are primarily transient in nature, including:​
Click to expand...
I'd be hanging my hat on "primarily transient in nature" and the example I gave earlier that in a typical R-1 occupancy (hotel/motel) people can stay longer than 30 days. The intended design is for short stays, but people can stay longer.

The idea is that it is designed for the most restrictive occupancy type, and it should function just fine for a less restrictive use.
 
Yikes said:
Yankee Chronicler, it can't be R-2 because there is no sleeping unit, and also because there is only one dwelling unit on the whole site. That means the rooms inside don't qualify as sleeping units.
Click to expand...
How did you determine that there is exactly 1 dwelling unit on the site?

Suppose there's no kitchen in the building, just 20 bedrooms and 20 bathrooms, it's definitely not a dwelling unit then, yes? And it would be a dormitory?

Add one kitchen and now it's a dwelling unit? What if the building is 3 floors and we have 3 kitchens, one on each floor, is it still 1 dwelling unit? Or is it 3 dwelling units, one for each floor?

Add 20 kitchens, one for each bathroom and bedroom, and now it's an apartment building with 20 dwelling units, yes?

Genuinely a bit perplexed by these definitions.

Cheers, Wayne
 
wwhitney said:
How did you determine that there is exactly 1 dwelling unit on the site?

Suppose there's no kitchen in the building, just 20 bedrooms and 20 bathrooms, it's definitely not a dwelling unit then, yes? And it would be a dormitory?

Add one kitchen and now it's a dwelling unit? What if the building is 3 floors and we have 3 kitchens, one on each floor, is it still 1 dwelling unit? Or is it 3 dwelling units, one for each floor?

Add 20 kitchens, one for each bathroom and bedroom, and now it's an apartment building with 20 dwelling units, yes?

Genuinely a bit perplexed by these definitions.

Cheers, Wayne
Click to expand...
Yes, check out the definition of “dwelling unit” shown in Post #3. Note that it even concedes that dormitories and homeless shelters can be a type of dwelling unit.
If there were no kitchen within the unit, it would not be a dwelling unit. Add one common kitchen FOR USE BY THE RESIDENTS, it becomes a dwelling unit.
If food is prepared by the management, now it might be some kind of boarding house.
Add one kitchen inside the bedroom (which already has an en suite bathroom, and now that bedroom becomes its own studio apartment dwelling unit.
 
Convents, monasteries, fraternities and sororities all typically have kitchens, and they are all specifically listed as R-2. I fail to see how this is any different.

Ultimately, though, it will be determined by the AHJ.
 
Yankee Chronicler said:
Convents, monasteries, fraternities and sororities all typically have kitchens, and they are all specifically listed as R-2. I fail to see how this is any different.

Ultimately, though, it will be determined by the AHJ.
Click to expand...
I agree. I also note that a congregate residence can be R-1, R-2 or R-3 depending on the number of people, length of stay, and number of dwelling units created. I am equally puzzled.

I really appreciate you all responding, and yes, disagreeing, because it points out the lack of clarity regarding the life safety intent behind the different classifications.
 
Yikes said:
Yes, check out the definition of “dwelling unit” shown in Post #3. Note that it even concedes that dormitories and homeless shelters can be a type of dwelling unit.
Click to expand...
OK, that definition has 2 parts. The original part is the IBC definition. The second part is a California amendment and is "For the purposes of Chapter 11A." As Chapter 3 is not Chapter 11A, I don't think the California amendment has any bearing on applying Chapter 3, you can ignore it.

Also, just looking at the California amendment for the purposes of Chapter 11A, it redefines dwelling unit as "a single unit of residence for a family of one or more persons." Reading the rest of that amendment, it sounds like for purposes of Chapter 11A, you would have 20 dwelling units, not one.

Cheers, Wayne
 
wwhitney said:
Also, just looking at the California amendment for the purposes of Chapter 11A, it redefines dwelling unit as "a single unit of residence for a family of one or more persons." Reading the rest of that amendment, it sounds like for purposes of Chapter 11A, you would have 20 dwelling units, not one.
Click to expand...

20 dwelling units with one, shared kitchen? I don't think that works, even under the California code.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top