• Welcome to the new and improved Building Code Forum. We appreciate you being here and hope that you are getting the information that you need concerning all codes of the building trades. This is a free forum to the public due to the generosity of the Sawhorses, Corporate Supporters and Supporters who have upgraded their accounts. If you would like to have improved access to the forum please upgrade to Sawhorse by first logging in then clicking here: Upgrades

Unlimited Area Buildings and Type of Construction

While not in the Building Code, this is from the fire code. This requirementy does not go away with sprinklers and open yards without other (non-code) required alternate fire protection features such as standpipes, dry hydrants, etc. that are acceptable to the authority haivng jurisidiction. (see exception number 2.)

503.1.1 Buildings and facilities. Approved fire apparatus access roads shall be provided for every facility, building or

portion of a building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction. The fire apparatus access road shall

comply with the requirements of this section and shall extend to within 150 feet (45 720 mm) of all portions of the

facility and all portions of the exterior walls of the first story of the building as measured by an approved route around the

exterior of the building or facility.

Exception: The fire code official is authorized to increase the dimension of 150 feet (45 720 mm)where:

1. The building is equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1, 903.3.1.2 or

903.3.1.3.

2. Fire apparatus access roads cannot be installed because of location on property, topography, waterways, nonnegotiable grades or other similar

conditions, and an approved alternative means of fire protection is provided.

3. There are not more than two Group R-3 or Group U occupancies.
 
Builder Bob, I agree completely.; nobody is saying they don't have to meet Sec 503 of the fire code. Be careful about mixing apples and oranges. The section you posted is universal for all buildings whether they have 60' yards or no yards.

Please note however, that the distance can be increased for fully sprinklered buildings.

But it is a stand alone requirement, and is not related to the unlimited area provisions.

If they meet the fire code, and meet 507 for unlimited buildings, why does it matter if part of the 60' yard slope is 3:1?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The proposed building will have about 40 feet level at the back of the building, then it's uphill at a 3:1
Click to expand...
Should not be a problem for the FD either. As brudgers pointed out they may be calling it a Type V but I bet the exterior walls are concrete block.
 
texasbo said:
And I think the intent is increased separation from other structures as much or more than it is for fire access. But regardless, a yard is a yard.

Lastly, the authors of the handbooks are no more experts than many of the members here; I'd place my trust in the interpretation of members of this forum before I would ICC.
Click to expand...
I just completed a Nonstructural Fire and Life Safety Principles class put on by Jay Woodard, an ICC Staff Architect and instructor. The emphasis on the reason the yards are required is simply to increase separation to the point that other criteria become unimportant. The apparent emphasis was an emphasis on doing no harm to a neighboring structure, not an emphasis on the subject building being saved.

Texasbo and the ICC are, at last, one! (haha)
 
agb4:

To clarify Mark's comment, the Type V restriction in 507.3 only applies to buildings with an A-4 occupancy group.
 
RLGA said:
agb4:To clarify Mark's comment, the Type V restriction in 507.3 only applies to buildings with an A-4 occupancy group.
Click to expand...
Beat me to it. B,F,M,S may be of any type. it's only A-4 that cannot be type V.
 
RLGA said:
agb4:To clarify Mark's comment, the Type V restriction in 507.3 only applies to buildings with an A-4 occupancy group.
Click to expand...
Thanks Ron I was referring to the Original Post of a mixed use occupancy of M & S-1.
 
Jobsaver said:
I just completed a Nonstructural Fire and Life Safety Principles class put on by Jay Woodard, an ICC Staff Architect and instructor. The emphasis on the reason the yards are required is simply to increase separation to the point that other criteria become unimportant. The apparent emphasis was an emphasis on doing no harm to a neighboring structure, not an emphasis on the subject building being saved.Texasbo and the ICC are, at last, one! (haha)
Click to expand...
Say it ain't so! Actually, Jay is a sharp guy, as are Ken Larsen and Hamid Naderi.
 
Please correct me if I am wrong, than a question: Type V construction is conventional light frame construction. How do 23' reinforced fully grouted CMU walls fit in with Type V construction?

It will be a sad day when I go to the dark side and admit that Type V construction can be unlimited in area. This would never happen under the UBC!
 
Type V may include conventional framing, but the description of Type V per the IBC is a building constructed "of any materials permitted by this code."

So, you can have a complete concrete only building and call it Type V if it is within the height and area requirements for a Type V building.
 
"This would never happen under the UBC! "

Oh, Ewenme, you shouldn't have said that.

505.2, 1994 UBC:

"The area of any one or two story building of Groups B; F Division 1 or 2; M; S Division 1,2,3,4, or 5; and H Division 5 Occupancies shall not be limited if the building is provided with an approved automatic sprinkler system...and is entirely surrounded and adjoined by public ways or yards not less than 60 feet in width"

I'm 100% in favor of re-adopting the 1988 UBC, however.
 
I also thought it was in there...............just hadn't got there yet. 505.2 in the 1997 UBC also.
 
ewenme said:
Please correct me if I am wrong, than a question: Type V construction is conventional light frame construction. How do 23' reinforced fully grouted CMU walls fit in with Type V construction? It will be a sad day when I go to the dark side and admit that Type V construction can be unlimited in area. This would never happen under the UBC!
Click to expand...
You are wrong.

Type V construction is construction which meets the requirements of Type V construction.

Type V does not require combustible materials such as wood - it simply allows their use.
 
I have the real answer now. After much discussion, I asked the right question: why would they choose the 'worst' type of construction when that's not what is shown on the plans? MONEY. Type 5-B construction is valued much less per square foot than Type I-B construction. It all comes down to money. I can see now that a $5 million building of Type V-B construction would cost less in terms of permit fees, taxes, etc., than a true-valued 130,000 sq. ft. Type I-B building...all because of the value difference by type of construction. Geesh.

My head hurts. I will definitely look at things with more skepticism... bordering on cynical, here. :banghd:pitty
 
all because of the value difference by type of construction. Geesh
Click to expand...
That is why you use the contract price for valuation not a valuation table based on occupancy and construction type. Most unlimited area box stores will designate a V-B construction type because of the flexibility it provides for the future remodels and changes that will happen during the life of that building.
 
Brudgers:

To you I'm wrong. To me, Type V-B includes conventional light frame construction, and is most commonly used for that. If you start looking for the positive, you'll find it.

Thanks to texasbo, fatboy, et al... I very much enjoyed the code discussion that my OP stirred up. And, I learned a valuable lesson: never be afraid to discuss.:cheers
 
ewenme said:
I have the real answer now. After much discussion, I asked the right question: why would they choose the 'worst' type of construction when that's not what is shown on the plans? MONEY. Type 5-B construction is valued much less per square foot than Type I-B construction. It all comes down to money. I can see now that a $5 million building of Type V-B construction would cost less in terms of permit fees, taxes, etc., than a true-valued 130,000 sq. ft. Type I-B building...all because of the value difference by type of construction. Geesh. My head hurts. I will definitely look at things with more skepticism... bordering on cynical, here. :banghd:pitty
Click to expand...
That's what you get for basing permit fees on construction type and square feet rather than actual cost of construction.
 
ewenme said:
Brudgers:To you I'm wrong. To me, Type V-B includes conventional light frame construction, and is most commonly used for that. If you start looking for the positive, you'll find it.
Click to expand...
Sorry, but if you are a code official, and you don't know the difference between conventional wood framing and Type V construction you should take up cosmetology or floral arranging an leave regulations to people who actually read the code.
 
Sorry, but if you are a code official, and you don't know the difference between conventional wood framing and Type V construction you should take up cosmetology or floral arranging an leave regulations to people who actually read the code.
Click to expand...
Funny. I could say the same thing about someone who doesn't know when to require a 13, 13R, or 13D sprinkler system.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top