Unlimited Area Buildings and Type of Construction

[RJJ]

Brudgers: It has been a good discussion so far! No need to attack ewenme! This lady does read the code and has been around the block a few times. She has raise an excellent question with a great deal of respond. No reason to put a lick in on someone when not deserved.

 

[mtlogcabin]

Type V-B includes conventional light frame construction, and is most commonly used for that

You are correct and it is the only construction type it can fit in all other construction types begin with "in which the exterior walls are of noncombustible materials"

Ignore the personal attack and continue to expand your knowledge.

He may have just been upset because you caught an item missed by both the architect and engineer :cheers

 

[pwood]

I have a 130,000 sq. ft. building, with mixed use occupancy of M & S-1. The Architect is claiming Unlimited Area AND Type V-B construction, quoting '09 IBC 507.3. I disagree with his call, citing Table 503, and Section 508.3.2, which references 503.1. The building is fully sprinklered throughout, however there are no fire separation walls. FYI: This is a Wal-Mart addition and full gut-remodel. I'd like to hear how others would call it.

ewenme,

i just plan checked and issued a similar permit with the same issues. there was about 100' of building perimeter less than 60' and greater than 40' that met the exception in 507.3 for reduced yard width and 3 hour construction. i came up with the same conclusion as the others, it is allowed. the plans were not bad, but i think the architects get paid by the page and number of details they can put in a set of plans. a whole lotta fluff in them plans!

 

[ewenme]

permit guy, RJJ, MTlogcabin and pwood: Thank you for your kind thoughts. I'm not the only one who has ever had the brunt of brudgers pointed stick, and I probably won't be the last. The architect and I had a very good discussion on this, and he agreed that what he had on his plans would qualify as Type I-B construction. He said he'd never been questioned about it before, which is why I posted my question here, to see what others have to say. I've gone to the dark side and agree that it can be Type V-B, but I don't like the reasoning behind it. Sprinklers, for me, are not the end-all be-all of construction. If I were caught in that store in a fire situation, I'd rather have a clear path to the exit; and if you've ever been in a big box store, you know the aisles are not always clear. If I look stupid for asking a question, that's OK... I know I'm not stupid. And, I deal with the ugly side of being a code official more than the pretty side.

 

[JBI]

When 'brudgers' has his grouch on, nobody is imune from his barbs. When he gets over himself again we'll see more constructive posts...

A very good discussion, and quite frankly a VERY common misconception about VB.

When it was part of my job description, our fee schedule was based on one of two numbers; the applicants estimated cost of construction OR our office's calculated cost based on square footage. When Wal-Mart submitted they actually put down a HUGE number (but they did have an 18' cut into rock on one side of the site and an 18' fill section on the opposite side; major improvements to one State Highway that included partial modification of an on ramp and an off ramp for a major highway; substantial improvements to a County Highway that included a new traffic light; and abadonment of one portion of a Town Road with improvements to the remainder of that road. Did I mention modifications to a regulated watercourse?) Even if they did lowball the number, our fee was sustantial and more than adequately covered our costs associated with the project.

 

[mtlogcabin]

When it was part of my job description, our fee schedule was based on one of two numbers; the applicants estimated cost of construction OR our office's calculated cost based on square footage. When Wal-Mart submitted they actually put down a HUGE number (but they did have an 18' cut into rock on one side of the site and an 18' fill section on the opposite side; major improvements to one State Highway that included partial modification of an on ramp and an off ramp for a major highway; substantial improvements to a County Highway that included a new traffic light; and abadonment of one portion of a Town Road with improvements to the remainder of that road. Did I mention modifications to a regulated watercourse?) Even if they did lowball the number, our fee was sustantial and more than adequately covered our costs associated with the project

WOW ours is based on the cost of the building only. We do not even include the parking lot let alone the improvements you mentioned.

 

[ewenme]

The Wal-Mart project was submitted with a 'bid estimate' as it hasn't gone out to bid yet... and their bid estimate was waaaaaaay over what our numbers showed. public works/water/sewer/storm water are all done by the Public Works department and the building permit covers just the building portion of the work. There are also permits for Electrical, HVAC and plumbing. We did not count the cost of the parking lot and landscaping. Needless to say, we'll be at their beck and call when it comes time for the quick inspections: they are paying for them!

On a different note: I often play the devil's advocate when I ask questions. Brudgers' meanness only encourages me! And I am looking forward to retirement so I can go tend to knitting and sewing, and granddaughters...and my garden.

 

[texasbo]

The architect and I had a very good discussion on this, and he agreed that what he had on his plans would qualify as Type I-B construction. He said he'd never been questioned about it before, which is why I posted my question here, to see what others have to say. I've gone to the dark side and agree that it can be Type V-B, but I don't like the reasoning behind it. Sprinklers, for me, are not the end-all be-all of construction. If I were caught in that store in a fire situation, I'd rather have a clear path to the exit; and if you've ever been in a big box store, you know the aisles are not always clear.

Ewenme, we've all been faced with the prospect of classifying a building in a category that is not intuitive to us. Just keep 602.1.1 in mind: we can't require a building "to conform to the details of a type of construction higher than that type, which meets the minimum requirements based on occupancy, even though certain features of such building actually conform to a higher type of construction." Sometimes the permit applicant will actually request classification to the higher type, and sometimes they won't.

 

[texasbo]

When 'brudgers' .... gets over himself again we'll see more constructive posts...

Yes, I too am looking forward to contributions to the Monty Python threads.

 

[steveray]

Yes, I too am looking forward to contributions to the Monty Python threads.

Always look on the bright side of construction types!

 

[brudgers]

permit guy, RJJ, MTlogcabin and pwood: Thank you for your kind thoughts. I'm not the only one who has ever had the brunt of brudgers pointed stick, and I probably won't be the last. The architect and I had a very good discussion on this, and he agreed that what he had on his plans would qualify as Type I-B construction. He said he'd never been questioned about it before, which is why I posted my question here, to see what others have to say. I've gone to the dark side and agree that it can be Type V-B, but I don't like the reasoning behind it. Sprinklers, for me, are not the end-all be-all of construction. If I were caught in that store in a fire situation, I'd rather have a clear path to the exit; and if you've ever been in a big box store, you know the aisles are not always clear. If I look stupid for asking a question, that's OK... I know I'm not stupid. And, I deal with the ugly side of being a code official more than the pretty side.

The design professional is responsible for classifying the construction type - the code official is responsible for reviewing the design against the requirements of the code including those for the construction type.

If his plans said "VB construction" then they would never qualify as IB. Ever.

I have little sympathy for anyone who views correctly applying the code as going over to the dark side.

 

[texasbo]

Nobody cares what or who you have sympathy for; you're not nearly that important.

There are 1131 members of this forum, and 1130 of them are here to help other members. One is here to try to make other people feel small. It doesn't take a psychologist to determine what kind of serious personality disorders go into making that kind of person.

 

[TJacobs]

Firefighters train on type of construction to establish tactics and strategy, pre-plans, etc. That is not a game.

The fire department protecting the building needs to get in the building during construction so they know what is actually there and not rely on a type of construction designation chosen by a design professional for a reason other than an accurate description of the construction type.

Our fees are the greater of the stated construction cost or the BVD chart just for that reason.

 

[brudgers]

Nobody cares what or who you have sympathy for; you're not nearly that important. There are 1131 members of this forum, and 1130 of them are here to help other members. One is here to try to make other people feel small. It doesn't take a psychologist to determine what kind of serious personality disorders go into making that kind of person.

Now I feel so small.

 

[Jobsaver]

Now I feel so small.

Thats what she said.

 

[mtlogcabin]

Firefighters train on type of construction to establish tactics and strategy, pre-plans, etc.

Do you train on building code types of construction or ISO defined? Can be a big difference.

ISO defines six construction classes for commercial buildings.

1. Frame - buildings with more than 1/3 of the total wall area of combustible materials

​

2. Joisted Masonry - buildings with 2/3 or more of the total wall area of masonry or fire-resistive materials, and more

than 1/3 of the total floor and roof area of combustible materials

​

3. Noncombustible - buildings with 2/3 or more of the total wall area and 2/3 or more of the floor and roof area of

noncombustible materials

​

4. Masonry Noncombustible - buildings with 2/3 or more of the total wall area of masonry or fire-resistive materials, and

2/3 or more of the total floor and roof area of noncombustible materials

​

5. Modified Fire Resistive - buildings with 2/3 or more of the total wall, floor, and roof area of masonry or materials with

a fire resistance rating of not less than one hour

​

6. Fire Resistive - buildings with 2/3 or more of the total wall, floor, and roof area of masonry or materials with a fire

​

resistance rating of not less than two hours

Brudgers is correct the design proffessional classifies the construction type it is the building code officials job to review the plans to meet the designated construction type. All buildings will meet Type VB just like a IA will meet a IIB and can be classified as such. As a plans examiner there is nothing wrong in asking a DP why they choose to go to a lower classification that is how we learn and understand another persons prespective. It also could be an error on the cover sheet as to the construction type and the designer may say Thank You for pointing that out.

Remember;

If you buy the statement you buy the underlying assumption

This applies to plan reviews also

 

[RLGA]

All buildings will meet Type VB

I think I know what you mean, but this is over simplification.

All buildings will comply with the material and fire-resistive requirements for Type VB construction. However, to be considered a Type VB building it must also be within the height and area requirements for Type VB.

 

[TJacobs]

Do you train on building code types of construction or ISO defined? Can be a big difference.

ISO defines six construction classes for commercial buildings.

​

1. Frame - buildings with more than 1/3 of the total wall area of combustible materials

​

2. Joisted Masonry - buildings with 2/3 or more of the total wall area of masonry or fire-resistive materials, and more

than 1/3 of the total floor and roof area of combustible materials

​

3. Noncombustible - buildings with 2/3 or more of the total wall area and 2/3 or more of the floor and roof area of

noncombustible materials

​

4. Masonry Noncombustible - buildings with 2/3 or more of the total wall area of masonry or fire-resistive materials, and

2/3 or more of the total floor and roof area of noncombustible materials

​

5. Modified Fire Resistive - buildings with 2/3 or more of the total wall, floor, and roof area of masonry or materials with

a fire resistance rating of not less than one hour

​

6. Fire Resistive - buildings with 2/3 or more of the total wall, floor, and roof area of masonry or materials with a fire

​

resistance rating of not less than two hours

Brudgers is correct the design proffessional classifies the construction type it is the building code officials job to review the plans to meet the designated construction type. All buildings will meet Type VB just like a IA will meet a IIB and can be classified as such. As a plans examiner there is nothing wrong in asking a DP why they choose to go to a lower classification that is how we learn and understand another persons prespective. It also could be an error on the cover sheet as to the construction type and the designer may say Thank You for pointing that out.

Remember;

If you buy the statement you buy the underlying assumption

This applies to plan reviews also

NFPA also has construction type definitions and that is what we used back in the day...

 

[mtlogcabin]

Lets see a super Wal-Mart at about 140,000 sq ft designated Type V construction unlimited area by the designer requires 8,000 GPM of fire flow. The same building Type IIB would be 4,000 GPM. Don't let them claim another type of construction or automaticaly take the 75% reduction to the fire flow requirements on an unlimited area building of Type V construction.

 

[ewenme]

RLGA: my point originally: Does 130,000 square feet meet the height and area requirements? with 60 ft yards? with sprinklers? Seems the over-simplification arises from the 'sprinklers': they evidently cover a multitude of life-safety issues and one should not question. The Fire Marshal and I had some deep discussions of the timing of 'removal of the existing sprinkler system', installation of the new fire hydrants, and how long the existing building would be 'non-fire-protected' during construction. Fire Marshal gave the ultimatum: you will put in the new hydrants before you disconnect the existing system or START CONSTRUCTION. I'm with him 100% on this. Although the only casualty would be the existing building, there would be fire fighters impacted and they're worth more than the building.

 

[Coug Dad]

Lets see a super Wal-Mart at about 140,000 sq ft designated Type V construction unlimited area by the designer requires 8,000 GPM of fire flow. The same building Type IIB would be 4,000 GPM. Don't let them claim another type of construction or automaticaly take the 75% reduction to the fire flow requirements on an unlimited area building of Type V construction.

But with the 75% reduction for sprinklers in the 2009 IFC it would still be managable either way.

 

[mtlogcabin]

However, to be considered a Type VB building it must also be within the height and area requirements for Type VB.

Disagree footnote "a" to table 503 gives general exceptions to the table that is applied to all construction types.

Height is limited to one or two story depending on occupancy type.

Area can be unlimited depending on occupancy type and a 60 ft open space around the building.

Coug Dad

i agree I just did not make my point very well. Don't let the DP tell the BD it is Type V and the FD see it is all concrete and call it a Type IIB. The review and requirements need to be consistant throughout

 

[Architect1281]

did I miss something in the begining discussion relating to the 507 unlimited area application of the code.

mine reads "IN OTHER THAN TYPE V (5)" so type 5 cannot be unlimited by use, by fire supression, by increased fire seperation distance ??

I'm going to duck and cover now!

 

[permitguy]

That only applies to the A-4 occupancy designation. The other occupancies listed may be of any construction type.