Play Structure occupant load

[pmarx]

IBC 2021
What would the the Occupant load factor be for something similar to below? I'm familiar with Section 424 but I can't find anything on determining the occupant load. We are in the process of creating construction documents for permits from the client's design architect. That architect gave us occupant load calculations based on 150 SF/occ based on a B use. The CDs for an earlier project by another architect used 50 SF/occ which presumably was based the load factor for exercise rooms. The latter is what we would use unless I'm missing something in the code.

Also, the design architect broke the structure into three separate levels (we have no information about the structure), and calculated three separate occupant loads (using 150 SF factor). Presumably treating these levels as "mezzanines" and using 1004.2.2 I understand that these are not true mezzanines but any opinion on this to determine an occupant load?

 

[RLGA]

Without knowing the configuration of the structure, I would use "assembly, concentrated" at 7 sq. ft. (net) for the area intended to be occupied soley by the play structure. With a multilevel, complex structure, the density of children to the area occupied by the play structure could be rather high.

Other areas of the room would be based on applicable OL factors.

 

[Inspector Gadget]

This post is one of the reasons I follow this forum, despite being a Canadian. I may have to deal with something like this in the future. My immediate thought was the same as the previous poster: assembly occupancy at its more dense calculation.

 

[Yankee Chronicler]

That one is larger, but there used to be a number of McDonald's and Burger King restaurants in my area that had indoor play areas. Based on my observations during visits to the restaurants, I think a ratio of 1:7 is not at all realistic. On the other hand, such a facility clearly isn't a business, and a ratio of 1:150 would be inadequate. I don't think the 1:50 ratio for exercise rooms would be accurate, either.

Such a facility isn't covered by IBC Table 1004.5. The IBC says, "Where an intended function is not listed in Table 1004.5, the building official shall establish a function based on a listed function that most nearly resembles the intended function." I don't think anything in Table 1004.5 comes close. I would ask the applicant to provide actual counts from similar facilities, with the counts taken at hours of peak use.

I think it's also important to keep in mind the nature of these playscapes. There are tubes and tunnels twisting and turning all over the place, from within which occupants can't see what's happening outside and, more importantly, can't see the exit(s). They may also become disoriented in those things. Whatever is done, I think this is a situation where it's better to err on the side of safety.

 

[Yankee Chronicler]

Without knowing the configuration of the structure, I would use "assembly, concentrated" at 7 sq. ft. (net) for the area intended to be occupied soley by the play structure. With a multilevel, complex structure, the density of children to the area occupied by the play structure could be rather high.

Other areas of the room would be based on applicable OL factors.

Absolutely.

 

[Inspector Gadget]

On the other hand, such a facility clearly isn't a business, and a ratio of 1:150 would be inadequate.

The indoor ones charge parents by the hour/part day/whatever. Very much a business.

 

[Penguin87]

Without knowing the configuration of the structure, I would use "assembly, concentrated" at 7 sq. ft. (net) for the area intended to be occupied soley by the play structure. With a multilevel, complex structure, the density of children to the area occupied by the play structure could be rather high.

Other areas of the room would be based on applicable OL factors.

Is that like standing room only playing? So the kids can't move?

I would give a call to your local AHJ and ask them how they have permitted these types of structures before. In our city there has to be at least 6 or more of them.

 

[RLGA]

SRO is 5 sq. ft./occupant. However, I conditioned my response on a "multilevel, complex structure." If you divided the horizontal floor area occupied by the structure by the number of children within the structure, regardless of where they are vertically or horizontally, you could theoretically end up with 7 sq. ft./occupant.

 

[bill1952]

Back in early 1990s a fire marshall, and I believe now assistant state fire marshall, and I were interested in this and together visited a number with tape and note book and cameras. Counting and measuring it was our opinion that the occupant load of these spaces did not exceed the 15 SF factor of the typical restaurant they were in. The assembly occupancy accepted our proposal and I believe that was first instance of code for multi level play structures. That could have changed in 3 decades.