Occupancy classification of a Unicorn congregate residence

[wwhitney]

20 dwelling units with one, shared kitchen? I don't think that works, even under the California code.

Again, that is just looking at the CA amendment "for the purposes of Chapter 11A". Chapter 11A is CA's rewritten version of Chapter 11. To excerpt post #3, that portion of the definition says:

"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."

Looking at just the above paragraph, and no other definitions, the requirement for provisions for "eating, cooking and sanitation" is not part of the definition. And the last sentence refers to "dormitory rooms" and "sleeping accommodations" in shelters as the "dwelling units", rather than referring to the whole shelter as a dwelling unit. So for the purposes of Chapter 11A, I think each of the 20 bedrooms would be a dwelling unit.

Cheers, Wayne

 

[mtlogcabin]

2018 IBC
[A] 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.

[A] 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.

The residents pay no rent; this is a not-for-profit ministry, so it's not a boarding house.

Don't care about profit or if rent is paid or not IMHO this functions as an R-2 use simply because they can stay longer than 30 days.

 

[Yikes]

2018 IBC
[A] 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.

[A] 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.


Don't care about profit or if rent is paid or not IMHO this functions as an R-2 use simply because they can stay longer than 30 days.

How do you get around these limitations of R-2 stated in the code:

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.

 

[Yankee Chronicler]

Again, that is just looking at the CA amendment "for the purposes of Chapter 11A". Chapter 11A is CA's rewritten version of Chapter 11. To excerpt post #3, that portion of the definition says:

"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."

Looking at just the above paragraph, and no other definitions, the requirement for provisions for "eating, cooking and sanitation" is not part of the definition. And the last sentence refers to "dormitory rooms" and "sleeping accommodations" in shelters as the "dwelling units", rather than referring to the whole shelter as a dwelling unit. So for the purposes of Chapter 11A, I think each of the 20 bedrooms would be a dwelling unit.

Cheers, Wayne

But it starts by saying "... for a family of one or more persons." A congregate living facility is occupied by unrelated individuals, so the above would not apply.

Meanwhile, under R-2 the IBC specifically lists dormitories, convents, monasteries, fraternities and sororities.

 

[wwhitney]

But it starts by saying "... for a family of one or more persons." A congregate living facility is occupied by unrelated individuals, so the above would not apply.

A bunch of unrelated individuals would be a bunch of families of size one. Hence each bedroom would have one family and would be one dwelling unit for the purposes of CA Chapter 11A.

Meanwhile, under R-2 the IBC specifically lists dormitories, convents, monasteries, fraternities and sororities.

Again, CA has its own definition of a "Chapter 11A dwelling unit" which is divorced from the rest of the IBC, so such references are irrelevant to this question. Which is a side question to the OP's question, unless the OP's concern is applying Chapter 11A.

My point was that in post #3, a bunch of the Chapter 11A specific portion of the definition of dwelling unit was bolded, but all such text is irrelevant to Chapter 3 questions.

Cheers, Wayne

 

[wwhitney]

How do you get around these limitations of R-2 stated in the code:

By letting go of the idea that the building is a single dwelling unit? That probably relies on interpreting the text "a single unit providing complete, independent living facilities . . ." E.g. deciding that all 20 bedrooms plus bathrooms plus one kitchen is too large to be a "single unit", and as the kitchen is shared, that means none of the bedrooms themselves have "independent" provisions for cooking.

Whether or not your building is one dwelling unit, it is most definitely a "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."

I would like to point out that your interpretation seems to be that any congregate residence with one kitchen is in fact one dwelling unit, and hence is not R-2. That seems to be too large a hole to square with the explicit listing of "congregate residences with more than 16 occupants" as being R-2 per 310.3.

Cheers, Wayne

 

[mtlogcabin]

302.1 Occupancy classification.
Occupancy classification is the formal designation of the primary purpose of the building, structure or portion thereof. Structures shall be classified into one or more of the occupancy groups listed in this section based on the nature of the hazards and risks to building occupants generally associated with the intended purpose of the building or structure. An area, room or space that is intended to be occupied at different times for different purposes shall comply with all applicable requirements associated with such potential multipurpose. Structures containing multiple occupancy groups shall comply with Section 508. Where a structure is proposed for a purpose that is not specifically listed in this section, such structure shall be classified in the occupancy it most nearly resembles based on the fire safety and relative hazard.

Pick one or a couple of names to call it the occupants are non-transient so based on fire safety and relative hazard IMHO it is an R-2.

Congregate living facilities (nontransient) with more than 16 occupants

Boarding houses (nontransient)

Convents

Dormitories

Fraternities and sororities

Monasteries

Hotels (nontransient)

Motels (nontransient)

Vacation timeshare properties

 

[Yikes]

But it starts by saying "... for a family of one or more persons." A congregate living facility is occupied by unrelated individuals, so the above would not apply.
Meanwhile, under R-2 the IBC specifically lists dormitories, convents, monasteries, fraternities and sororities.

R-3 already specifically lists congregate residences with 16 or fewer occupants, and they can be unrelated. So the proposed project is only adding 4 more people than that.

Meanwhile, the IBC definition of dormitory does not include cooking facilities. The proposed project has a single large kitchen for all the 20 bedroom occupants to use, and that's what's triggering the "one dwelling unit" description.

 

[Yankee Chronicler]

R-3 already specifically lists congregate residences with 16 or fewer occupants, and they can be unrelated. So the proposed project is only adding 4 more people than that.

And, since R-3 is specifically limited to 16 or fewer residents, adding even one more takes it out of R-3.

Meanwhile, the IBC definition of dormitory does not include cooking facilities. The proposed project has a single large kitchen for all the 20 bedroom occupants to use, and that's what's triggering the "one dwelling unit" description.

It also doesn't exclude a common kitchen.

[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.

Every fraternity house at the college I attended had a kitchen.

 

[Yikes]

And, since R-3 is specifically limited to 16 or fewer residents, adding even one more takes it out of R-3.



It also doesn't exclude a common kitchen.



Every fraternity house at the college I attended had a kitchen.

Yes, but what puts it back in R-3 is that R-3 is the only “R” that tells you to use it when your occupancy doesn’t fit the definition of the others (R-1, R-2, R-4…). The language in R-2 shows that the presence of only one dwelling unit and disqualifies it as R-2, and makes the sleeping areas not sleeping units, also disqualifying it from R-2.

Put another way, in addition to the prescriptive R-3 descriptions (such as Congregate Residence for 16 or less), R-3 also appears to be the only prescriptive catch-all for things that don’t neatly fit elsewhere, the island of misfit toys in the world of “R”.

I too find it odd and disturbing, because the extreme left under this logic I could have a house with 1000 bedrooms and one giant common use kitchen, and it could be called R-3.
However, at 20 bedrooms it appears that AHJ thinks this is “close enough” to fit the catch-all of R-3.

 

[wwhitney]

The language in R-2 shows that the presence of only one dwelling unit and disqualifies it as R-2, and makes the sleeping areas not sleeping units, also disqualifying it from R-2.

The sticking point here is that you are calling it one dwelling unit. While the definition of dwelling unit is broad enough that it is plausible to do so when considered in isolation, the various issues raised here show that overall it is not reasonable to call this congregate residence a single dwelling unit.

With 0 kitchens, it clearly would not be a dwelling unit. With 2 or more kitchens, given the breadth of the dwelling unit definition, we could call it 2 or more dwelling units. Only the case of 1 kitchen is in question as far as 310.3. But it is implausible that the intent of 310.3 is to single out the case of a congregate residence with exactly 1 kitchen and treat that differently from the case of 0 kitchens or 2 or more kitchens.

So maybe the definition of dwelling unit should be sharpened so that a congregate residence with 1 kitchen may not be plausibly called one dwelling unit. But even without any change, there's enough flexibility and imprecision in the language to permit the interpretation that this congregate residence is not a single dwelling unit. Which is the more reasonable choice for applying Section 310.

Cheers, Wayne

 

[Joe.B]

What level of privacy does each resident have. Do the doors to each unit lock? Does each unit have its own bathroom? Does each resident have their own address? What kind of staff run the facility? Is there an on-site manager? Janitorial staff?

I suspect when you look at the "business model" or operational planning, it would most closely resemble an R-1.

 

[mtlogcabin]

Is this use regulated by other agencies such as health department. If so it is no longer just a single family dwelling use

 

[JPohling]

I am sure they will be providing other services for these residents. I would classify it as a R-2.1

 

[Yikes]

No other licensed social services are being provided.
Here's how we're going to solve it: We'll let the city AHJ call it R-3, but we are still designing all fire/life safety features to comply with R-2.