:surr Nope. Done. Finished. :surr
I met with the AHJ again today and I expressed in no uncertain terms that the school wants to improve their facilities but that no improvements can be made if the full fixture count is enforced. We went around in circles for a while talking about all manner of possible ways around the issue but no luck.
No, they don't care if it is a voluntary improvement, it still needs to meet the code, which includes the full fixture count.
No, it doesn't matter if we consider it an addition to an existing building. The new part still needs to meet the code, which includes fixture count.
No, we cannot consider just the one side of the stadium. If you want to eliminate one side then you have to physically tear them down.
No, the occupant load of the stadium cannot be adjusted. It must be calculated per the code.
No, we cannot substitute the UPC for fixture count because our NM code uses the IBC, period.
At one point the discussion got strangely argumentative which I really was not expecting. They said "I'm warning you, I might just want to include the occ load from those tennis courts over there too." :shock: That one really threw me for a loop. The courts are on the other side of the Gym so I didn't even consider them part of the equation, but apparently they could be used as a threat since I wasn't just rolling over and saying OK-you-win-I'll-go-away-now.
They did make one very minor concession. We could propose a single family/assisted toilet room as an addition to the existing facilities. In that case the existing restrooms would not need to be touched. Otherwise any renovations to the restrooms would trigger the full requirement. I might have been happy about this except the reason they gave is, "The ADA guys would kill us if we didn't try to work with you on that part". Ok, as long as you HAVE to throw me a bone so YOU don't get in trouble then i guess its just peachy. :roll:
So the end result is that no improvements will be made at all.

The project is dead.

itty I'm usually a proponent of codes in general but in this case I think the system has failed in a big way. I even got a "hey, you're welcome to submit a variance, but they're just gonna shoot it down, so go right ahead."
Ok... Rant over. Thanks for sticking with me this far.
-LP