Selecting the right Occupancy

[RJJ]

Many of us deal with a larger variety of existing buildings and as uses change, at times, we have new occupancy's that want to use an existing structure. One of the issues is often the fine line between a B use and an and M. Also, S1&S2 and in general all occupancies groups. Looking for some of those choices that have been made and some times controversial with the applicant. Not really interested in the argument between the applicant, but rather how the plan reviewer came to the conclusion of just why they applied a particular use.

This often comes up in the setting of the old main street with stores and living above. I believe this could produce some great discussion and may just benefit the group as a whole. Occupancy seems to be the threshold to all code application.

 

[jar546]

I have this actual situation right now and the argument is being made before they even make a submission.

It was a jewelry store with display cases and a small repair area in the back. In my opinion, it was an M (older building with no CO)

The proposed use is for a computer repair shop and IT department that will have servers. There will not be a display area of merchandise but the applicant is making the argument that since they sell computers to IT customers and to others, it is therefore an M and not a B even though we were verbally told and the zoning officer was told that the shop will only be for employees and no one will be there shopping, only picking up their product that was repaired or sold to them.

I have a 400,000 sq foot warehouse that sells diapers all over the country and it is certainly not an M because they are not a retail space. They are an S-1 with a B area.

Still not sure on how I will make a decision on this one. Still waiting for official paperwork.

 

[rshuey]

I am the BCO here in Bellefonte, PA. We've had quite a few changes of occupancy the past couple years. B's to M's, triggering the 2 hour separation between the M and the R's above. It's a tricky subject and becomes extremely political at times. Just last summer I had our local Council try to "throw out" the state codes...lol Crazy, crazy times. In the end, our solicitor told them to let me do my job and to back off. It's a shame so many of them felt the need to threaten my job for 4 months.

We are currently working on using our 2010 CDBG money to start installing fire suppression systems into downtown business buildings. This will take away the 2 hour issue with change of use. It will be a low-interest , revolving loan program. Should be pretty neat. I will keep you updated.

 

[rshuey]

I have this actual situation right now and the argument is being made before they even make a submission.It was a jewelry store with display cases and a small repair area in the back. In my opinion, it was an M (older building with no CO)

The proposed use is for a computer repair shop and IT department that will have servers. There will not be a display area of merchandise but the applicant is making the argument that since they sell computers to IT customers and to others, it is therefore an M and not a B even though we were verbally told and the zoning officer was told that the shop will only be for employees and no one will be there shopping, only picking up their product that was repaired or sold to them.

I have a 400,000 sq foot warehouse that sells diapers all over the country and it is certainly not an M because they are not a retail space. They are an S-1 with a B area.

Still not sure on how I will make a decision on this one. Still waiting for official paperwork.

What about using "professional services" and call it a "B" with M being an accessory use (less than 10% of floor area)??

May help.

Diaper warehouse looks like you are right. Don't back down....trust me. BIG PAPER TRAILS ARE A MUST..lol

 

[jar546]

They are trying to get away from the B and want to declare all M so that it is not a change of use and occupancy classification

 

[rshuey]

Even if it ends up being a change of use from a M to a B, what's the issue? It's a lower hazard category, so separations should be good. And accessibility should be ok...not sure why it's an issue.

 

[mtlogcabin]

but rather how the plan reviewer came to the conclusion of just why they applied a particular use.

In our downtown area I will look at the amount and type of goods and products being sold and will not change a "B" to an "M" Example a real estate office moves out and a cell phone store moves in. Less fuel loading and traffic with the cell phone store they are service type transactions leave it a "B".

A gift shop moves out ("M") and a print shop moves in. The print shop also sells card stock, pens, paper, and graphic arts supplies which occupy more than 10% of the floor area leave it an "M"

Once you start getting over about 2,500 sq ft I am not as flexible. We have very few residential units above other occupancies so it has not been a question since I have been here.

 

[Coug Dad]

Don't forget that under some of the legacy building codes, retail and office were the same occupancy classification. I might be a little for flexible on the gray issues.

 

[peach]

Other than potential occupancy load, there isn't much difference between B&M. Occupancy classification is always the funnest part of plan review (and the most important).

Existing buildings are always hard to classify.. in this current economy, I'd give them the benefit of the doubt.

 

[RJJ]

I have to agree with peach on the way we classify the occupancy is the most important part! The review starts with that issue. There are other mixes of occupancy that can be difficult, but focusing on the B & M for now will be interesting. Yes we can discuss the related fire load as it relates, but the slight differences that may exists is the judgement call area. Or is it? The B lists professional service, I believe this is the critical line between B & M. The word service would allow me to conclude it is a B.

Peach: you raise an interesting point that there is not much difference between B & M, but the reason for the post is to bring out some of those differences. Do they exist? Is it at all important? What use are those sections of code if it is not an important dividing line? Did the code writers just want to make the code book thicker or is there an important reason for the separation?

 

[brudgers]

My take if I were the code official:

B and M and S1 are all the same hazard based on the occupancy separations in Table 508.3.3.

Therefore, I would tend to be flexible in regards to switches between these uses in existing buildings in a downtown.

Of course as an architect, I still have to be completely anal about change of occupancy and tell the client, "I don't give a ratsass what the building official will allow."

Go figure

 

[mtlogcabin]

the reason for the post is to bring out some of those differences.

Occupant Loads

B 100 sq ft per person

M 30 sq ft per person

 

[Coug Dad]

A little clarification:

Buisiness (Group B) 100 square foot per person

Dining less than 50 (also Group B) 15 square feet per person

Mercantile (Group M) 30 square feet per person

Occupancy classification (A, B, M, etc) usually, but not always equates to "functions" for occupant load factors in Table 1004.1.1

 

[peach]

Hey RJJ... that's why I said except for occupancy load.. it's an exiting thing...

In a brand new building (like a strip shopping center), I've always assumed the worst (M).. but you never know if a day care center is going in.. (which kind of blows "the worst case" out of the water)... but based on the size, a front and back exit usually work.

In existing buildings you need to look at the primary use, and if it's technically feasible to add bathrooms and another exit.

My favorite is always hair dressers/salons, etc... personal service (B) is the primary use, but there is always a retail element involved.