# Building Separation



## nononsense (Jan 14, 2010)

I have a new type II-B building with a type V-B existing building 18 feet away on the same property, both building are “E” occupancy.

Am I interpreting the ICC (2006) table 602 correctly in that I don’t need to rate the exterior wall of the new building? If not what am I missing.

Thanks in advance.


----------



## cda (Jan 14, 2010)

Re: Building Separation

welcome


----------



## mtlogcabin (Jan 14, 2010)

Re: Building Separation

You need to assume a property line between the buildings. If the existing V-B does not have a one hour rated exterior wall then place the assumed property line at 10'1" out this leaves 7'11" from the assumed property line to the new II-B building. Table 602 states less than 10' but = or greater than 5' requires a one hour exterior wall


----------



## texasbo (Jan 15, 2010)

Re: Building Separation

Nononsense,

Thanks for coming to this board for help. It's good to see we're getting some outside traffic.

You may also check to see if the aggregate area of both buildings is within the allowable area for V-B. Then you could consider them a single building, and not have to worry about separation and wall/opening protection.


----------



## brudgers (Jan 15, 2010)

Re: Building Separation



			
				nononsense said:
			
		

> Am I interpreting the ICC (2006) table 602 correctly in that I don’t need to rate the exterior wall of the new building? If not what am I missing..


An architect.


----------



## fatboy (Jan 15, 2010)

Re: Building Separation

I agree with texasbo, two buildings, same lot, if allowable area works for most restrictive, then consider it one building.........


----------



## EPrice (Jan 15, 2010)

Re: Building Separation

One caution.  If the areas of the buildings are such that you can consider them to be one building and not rate the walls, then I believe the total area of the two buildings needs to be used when applying 903.2.2.


----------



## texasbo (Jan 15, 2010)

Re: Building Separation

Fire area is defined by exterior walls.


----------



## brudgers (Jan 15, 2010)

Re: Building Separation

Just out of curiosity, for those Code Officials offering design advice:

1.  Do you hold the required credentials to design an educational facility in your jurisdiction?

2.  Would you accept plans for an educational facility from a person lacking such credentials in your jurisdiction?


----------



## fatboy (Jan 15, 2010)

Re: Building Separation

no and no

EDIT: After texasbo's excellent answer, I will finish mine. I don't have the credentials to design a facility, but I do have plenty for offering advice, such as a CBCO and a CFCO. There's a mountain of difference between advice and and actully designing. Lighten up, nobody's taking work from you.


----------



## texasbo (Jan 15, 2010)

Re: Building Separation



			
				brudgers said:
			
		

> Just out of curiosity, for those Code Officials offering design advice:1.  Do you hold the required credentials to design an educational facility in your jurisdiction?
> 
> 2.  Would you accept plans for an educational facility from a person lacking such credentials in your jurisdiction?


Among the numerous state licenses, professional certifications, and other credentials I hold, two of them are ICC Certified Building Official and Plans Examiner. Even without those credentials, I would meet all requirements to offer construction code advice on this forum to those asking for help.

That's why I'm here.

You?


----------



## kilitact (Jan 15, 2010)

Re: Building Separation

brudgers wrote:



> Just out of curiosity, for those Code Officials offering design advice:1. Do you hold the required credentials to design an educational facility in your jurisdiction?
> 
> 2. Would you accept plans for an educational facility from a person lacking such credentials in your jurisdiction?
> 
> Just out of curiosity, for those Code Officials offering design advice:


NO and NO

Offering design advice in an “official” capacity is a slippery slope.


----------



## brudgers (Jan 15, 2010)

Re: Building Separation



			
				texasbo said:
			
		

> brudgers said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Among the numerous state licenses, professional certifications, and other credentials I hold, two of them are ICC Certified Building Official and Plans Examiner. Even without those credentials, I would meet all requirements to offer construction code advice on this forum to those asking for help.

That's why I'm here.

You?

Well the reason for my question is that if the existing construction is typical of (but not necessary for) Type VB construction, and the new building necessitates type IIB construction, the common suggestion that they can be treated as two buildings on the same lot is most likely impractical.

Of course impractical advice on the internet is quite common, but in this case there is some evidence that the OP is a bit over their head and in need of a design professional...If the combined buildings could be classified as VB then it is difficult to judge the OP competent when they have classified the new construction as IIB.


----------



## brudgers (Jan 15, 2010)

Re: Building Separation



			
				kilitact said:
			
		

> brudgers wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


NO and NO

Offering design advice in an “official” capacity is a slippery slope.

I thought everybody in Oregon was qualified to design buildings.


----------



## texasbo (Jan 16, 2010)

Re: Building Separation



			
				brudgers said:
			
		

> texasbo said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Well the reason for my question is that if the existing construction is typical of (but not necessary for) Type VB construction, and the new building necessitates type IIB construction, the common suggestion that they can be treated as two buildings on the same lot is most likely impractical.

Of course impractical advice on the internet is quite common, but in this case there is some evidence that the OP is a bit over their head and in need of a design professional...If the combined buildings could be classified as VB then it is difficult to judge the OP competent when they have classified the new construction as IIB.

Understood. However, based on my experience with those not intimately familiar with the codes, it would not surprise me at all if they just arbitrarily assigned a construction type based on the materials used in the new building.

And just as impractical advice is common on the internet, so is sarcasm, pretentiousness, condescention, and arrogance.  If in fact the OP is a bit over their head, then that is probably why they came here asking for help in the first place. And some of us are here for precisely that reason; to help people understand the code and offer our expertise and years of experience to help them with their problems. Architects, engineers, and designers are faced with myriad issues, and (despite what you and I do and see on a daily basis) the codes are just a portion of those issues. If they can come here and get advice/interpretations from code experts, then I applaud them, and will help them in any way possible.

Many in the design/construction industry don't know the intricacies of the codes, and if they come here for help, then the least we can do is point them in the right direction. What they do from that point is up to them.


----------



## texasbo (Jan 16, 2010)

Re: Building Separation



			
				kilitact said:
			
		

> brudgers wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


NO and NO

Offering design advice in an “official” capacity is a slippery slope.

HUH???!!! Who said ANYTHING about offering design advice? Who said anything about "official" capacity? What do you think this forum is all about?

What about offering code advice in a "non official" capacity on an internet forum? Is that a slippery slope? If so, then this entire website, and most of your posts, are lubed up slicker than Rick (just kidding around here, Rick) Astoria's keyboard...

Are you guys actually saying that as building professionals, you don't think we should give building code advice on a building code forum? Are you serious? Have you read any of your own posts? Am I the only one who thinks this is all a little...crazy?


----------



## kilitact (Jan 16, 2010)

Re: Building Separation

texasbo wrote;



> HUH???!!! *Who said ANYTHING about offering design advice? Who said anything about "official" capacity?* What do you think this forum is all about?What about offering code advice in a "non official" capacity on an internet forum? Is that a slippery slope? If so, then this entire website, and most of your posts, are lubed up slicker than Rick (just kidding around here, Rick) Astoria's keyboard...
> 
> Are you guys actually saying that as building professionals, you don't think we should give building code advice on a building code forum? Are you serious? Have you read any of your own posts? Am I the only one who thinks this is all a little...crazy?


Do you even read what is posted before you start running your keyboard?? :roll:

what brudgers wrote:



> Just out of curiosity, for those Code Officials offering design advice:1. Do you hold the required credentials to design an educational facility in your jurisdiction?
> 
> 2. Would you accept plans for an educational facility from a person lacking such credentials in your jurisdiction?
> 
> Just out of curiosity, for those Code Officials offering design advice:


texasbo, can you see the words code officials and design advice in the question :lol:  :lol:

brudgers wrote;



> I thought everybody in Oregon was qualified to design buildings


one could think that from reading some of these post


----------



## fatboy (Jan 16, 2010)

Re: Building Separation

OK folks, let's back it up a bit. The OP asked a specific question, and a few answers were put forth. If you want to start a thread about qualifications, then do so. That's not what this thread was about. My last reply was borderline, as to what the OP was about. Let's not turn this into a "garage door header".


----------



## texasbo (Jan 16, 2010)

Re: Building Separation



			
				kilitact said:
			
		

> texasbo wrote;
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Do you even read what is posted before you start running your keyboard?? :roll:

what brudgers wrote:



> Just out of curiosity, for those Code Officials offering design advice:1. Do you hold the required credentials to design an educational facility in your jurisdiction?
> 
> 2. Would you accept plans for an educational facility from a person lacking such credentials in your jurisdiction?
> 
> Just out of curiosity, for those Code Officials offering design advice:


texasbo, can you see the words code officials and design advice in the question :lol:  :lol:

brudgers wrote;



> I thought everybody in Oregon was qualified to design buildings


one could think that from reading some of these post   [/quote:2fimjnv4]

Uh, yeah; I saw it in his question, and I saw in your post. Strangely, that's the only two places I've seen it. That's kinda my point.


----------



## kilitact (Jan 16, 2010)

Re: Building Separation

texasbo I don't see any point to your point, but somehow I get the point that you consider this a forum that appears to predicate the notion that somehow you’re the code “expert” and this code forum is to enable non-professionals the opportunity to come and get “expert” code design advice. My understanding of the focal point of this code forum was for code discussions, exchange of various code interpretations, questions asked and answered from code officials and generally to be used as a learning tool primarily for building code officials and end users. I don’t see it has a tool for non-professionals to come and get building code design advice or to be used as a format for non-professionals to sell their non-professional expertise.


----------



## mtlogcabin (Jan 16, 2010)

Re: Building Separation

4 of us answered the OP question with 2 different code solutions and advice on things to consider when looking at which one to choose. No different than pre-job meeting I have sat in on. The assumption that has been made is nononsense is a Designer when he may be new to the plan review or is working in a small (one man/woman) office and is looking for advice on what to look for.

Lets try and stick to answering the OP's and stay off of the rabbit trails


----------



## kilitact (Jan 16, 2010)

Re: Building Separation

mtlogcabin wrote'



> Lets try and stick to answering the OP's and stay off of the rabbit trails4 of us answered the OP question with 2 different code solutions and advice on things to consider when looking at which one to choose. No different than pre-job meeting I have sat in on. *The assumption that has been made is nononsense *is a Designer when he may be new to the plan review or is working in a small (one man/woman) office and is looking for advice on what to look for.
> 
> Lets try and stick to answering the OP's and stay off of the rabbit trails


Here your making a statement that the assumption is: when I don't see that any assumption was made about the op's position  rather a question was asked by brudgers and some took off on a tangent about some mysterious assumptions they made, perhaps before taking the blue pill?    

yea: lets try to read what is posted before making these wild leaps and posting responses that are all over the field.


----------



## jar546 (Jan 16, 2010)

Re: Building Separation

We are way off topic.  There is an area on this board for design professionals.  Lets not get personal and start a new thread where it belongs.

This forum is for all people, there is no way to actually know who is posting here.

If anyone wants to offer advice, then I applaud them.  It is encouraged.

Those who post here still have to go through the permit, plan review and inspection process in the jurisdiction they are performing work.


----------



## fatboy (Jan 16, 2010)

Re: Building Separation

BINGO!


----------



## kilitact (Jan 16, 2010)

Re: Building Separation

fatboy wrote;



> BINGO!


What did you win?? :?:


----------



## brudgers (Jan 16, 2010)

Re: Building Separation

If a someone came into your office with these questions about an educational occupancy would you start giving code advice, or would you advise them that they need a design professional?


----------



## mtlogcabin (Jan 16, 2010)

Re: Building Separation

Both I would have answered their questions and then advise them to get a DP. In my experience the OP's question would have come from a DP originally or maybe from someone on a building committee doing some due diligence


----------



## texasbo (Jan 16, 2010)

Re: Building Separation



			
				brudgers said:
			
		

> If a someone came into your office with these questions about an educational occupancy would you start giving code advice, or would you advise them that they need a design professional?


1) It is entirely possible that nononsense IS a design professional; the question was not unlike questions we routinely see on these boards from DP's. We'll probably never know however, based on the ridiculousness that followed his post.

2) This isn't anyone's office

3) I would be perfectly comfortable giving the explanation that I gave regardless of the forum.


----------



## JBI (Jan 16, 2010)

Re: Building Separation

Hey, How about those Jets? They're looking pretty good for tomorrows game...


----------



## jar546 (Jan 16, 2010)

Re: Building Separation

Building separation or thread lock.


----------



## kilitact (Jan 17, 2010)

Re: Building Separation

jar546 wrote;



> Building separation *or* thread lock.


I like to use Loctite 271 High Strength Thread Locker when working on cars.


----------



## fatboy (Jan 17, 2010)

Re: Building Separation

I agree Jeff, getting close.......... :roll:


----------



## jar546 (Jan 18, 2010)

Re: Building Separation

1 post and gone.  I just hate that.  Darn cornhuskers


----------



## brudgers (Jan 18, 2010)

Re: Building Separation



			
				jar546 said:
			
		

> 1 post and gone.  I just hate that.  Darn cornhuskers


Maybe the OP just heard what they wanted to hear.

It looked like that kind of question to me.


----------



## jar546 (Jan 18, 2010)

Re: Building Separation

I say that a lot about people "hearing what they wanted to hear" and that is true.  When people are not happy with a decision they keep asking others until someone tells them what they want to hear.  If you ask enough people, you will get the answer you are looking for.  I suppose it is another form of denial.

I have said this before but anyone who posts here for info will eventually have to go through the permit process, plan review and inspections in the jurisdiction in which the live.  What we offer here is an opionion.  A personal opinion.  It is nice to be able to bounce ideas and get a different perspective on situations that make us think more.  I appreciate being able to do that.

There are enough poorly written or shall I say "worded" codes that allow for multiple perceptions with no clear intent.  So many situations out there and not all fit snuggly into the written code.  I look at these codes as minimal guidelines even though in many jurisdictions, they are law and the way they are enforced can have a significant impact whether it be financial, contribute to savings someone's life or contribute to someone being hurt or killed.

This is a small planet and we nor the codes are the axis.  Alas, my mind is drifting so I better stop.


----------



## nononsense (Jan 18, 2010)

Re: Building Separation

Thanks for all of the constructive responses from everyone although I must say it must be wonderful to be born with all of the knowledge of ones particular career instead of acquiring it throughout a lifetime like the rest of us. Although I could justify my question with an excuse I won’t because I don’t need to prove or explain myself to anyone on this forum. If everyone was 100% qualified to do their job then forums such as this would not exist.

Bruggers comments of being over my head are par for the course on this site and others. He’s obviously the forums resident bully and probably enjoys it. Who is he to question someone’s qualifications?  Maybe we should send him our resumes and he can tell us if we are qualified to do our jobs. If we don’t measure up to the “Elitist” then we should be handed pink slips. My guess is that others like me are tired of the negative comments that come from his keyboard hole. More often than not taking questions in a different direction so he can his fill his already swollen head.

CODE REQUIREMENT: MINIMUM 10’-0” HIGH DOORS AT THE BRUGGERS RESIDENCE.

Undoubtedly trolling forums for questions he can pounce on. Tough talk, calling someone out on a forum. Nice try, I can see people like him coming from a mile away, more than likely getting away with it most of the time but wouldn’t have the sac to face me in person.

As far as the comment if this is the right forum for the question asked... what? Then volunteer your time to screen and sort questions to make sure everything is perfectly package and fits precisely within the right category. If someone wants to answer the questions then they will, if they don’t, then they won’t. Take the question at face value, if you want to over analyze a question (or qualifications) go ahead, but chewing up four pages for a one page post just can be King of the Mountain give me a break!

Whether you’re an Architect, Code Official, Engineer or other we all have different perspectives, experiences and interpretations that I think for the most part are a pretty good check and balance system. It’s no different than kicking around a question in the office. Everyone puts in their two cents and it usually leads to a conclusion or consensus.

I see this forum as being one tool in a box of many, don’t use it every time but comes in handy every once in awhile.

"Slide to the Right"


----------



## jar546 (Jan 18, 2010)

Re: Building Separation

Welcome back nononsense.  We are hoping for some followup on your original post.  Thanks for sharing your thoughts on your 2nd post.

I like the part about it being just like kicking it around in the office.  Same thing.

Brudgers took the place of George Roberts from the old ICC board.  Very similar but not the same person to the best of my knowledge.

Anyway, welcome back.


----------



## JBI (Jan 19, 2010)

Re: Building Separation

Jeff - Actually brudgers and GR were _both_ on the old site, and I did sometimes wonder if he was GRs 'alter-ego'... NAH.

Personally I view him as more of the 'Board Crumudgeon' than an 'Elitist' but that's just me.   

Bashing him IS fun, but it is also counter-productive, and leads us down the wrong path. He does have quite a bit of knowledge, he just doesn't seem to want to share it very often. When he does it can be enlightening (sometimes). I always enjoy sharing ideas myself, but have been accused of being a 'know-it-all' or a 'show-off' (in real life, not here) at times. Here, I just get ribbed about the volume of posts I produce. I suppose it could be worse.

As far as focusing on 'qualifications' I offer a brief side-bar;

My Uncle worked for Eagle Pen & Pencil in Connecticut as a VP in Quality Control. The company was planning an expansion and a janitor who happened to see the plans asked what the new building would be used for (it was a couple of blocks long). After an Engineer was kind enough to explain the basics of the plan, the janitor (with his grade school education) made a funny face and asked why they didn't just do it 'this way instead', and proceeded to explain his (simple) thoughts. When he was done, the Engineers looked at each other and went back to their respective drawing boards.

That janitor, with his grade school education reduced the project scope to less than one block in size saving the company millions of dollars (1970s dollars BTW), and streamlining production in the process.

With all due respect to the 'degreed' members of this or any other forum, those letters after your name don't impress me in the least. What comes out of your mouth (or your keyboard) is what counts.


----------



## TJacobs (Jan 19, 2010)

Re: Building Separation



			
				John Drobysh said:
			
		

> Hey, How about those Jets? They're looking pretty good for tomorrows game...


JD, board psychic and prognosticator... :lol:


----------



## brudgers (Jan 19, 2010)

Re: Building Separation



			
				John Drobysh said:
			
		

> Bashing him IS fun, but it is also counter-productive, and leads us down the wrong path. He does have quite a bit of knowledge, he just doesn't seem to want to share it very often.


With two buildings of differing construction type, sited closely, and openings of indeterminate size, quantity, protection, and location how can anyone know enough to give a knowledgable technical answer?

I did share my knowledge.

The OP needs an architect.

The follow up post does nothing to indicate otherwise.

Even if there is no such thing as a dumb question, Morissa Tomei acurately classified "... what would the correct ignition timing be on a 1955 Bel Air Chevrolet, with a 327 cubic-inch engine and a four-barrel carburetor? "


----------



## texasbo (Jan 19, 2010)

Re: Building Separation



			
				brudgers said:
			
		

> John Drobysh said:
> 
> 
> 
> > Bashing him IS fun, but it is also counter-productive, and leads us down the wrong path. He does have quite a bit of knowledge, he just doesn't seem to want to share it very often.


With two buildings of differing construction type, sited closely, and openings of indeterminate size, quantity, protection, and location how can anyone know enough to give a knowledgable technical answer?

I did share my knowledge.

The OP needs an architect.

The follow up post does nothing to indicate otherwise.

Even if there is no such thing as a dumb question, Morissa Tomei acurately classified "... what would the correct ignition timing be on a 1955 Bel Air Chevrolet, with a 327 cubic-inch engine and a four-barrel carburetor? "

And the answer would be "that which delivers the spark at the proper time to deliver the most complete combustion, without causing predetonation".

And that's the same kind of correct, if not somewhat generic information SOME of us gave the OP; if nothing else, giving him some ideas to work from. Others gave him nothing, except ridicule.


----------



## JBI (Jan 19, 2010)

Re: Building Separation

brudgers - Stop trying to pick apart everyone elses' posts! You're not very good at it, constantly take things out of context, and only embarrass yourself in the process. My post, in its' entireity, was more a compliment than a slam - left-handed for the most part I'll grant you, but you make it so easy!

No, it wasn't the best question ever asked, yes there was critical information lacking. Wouldn't it make more sense to either prod the additional information out of the OP or possibly wait for someone elses queries to do so? Even ignoring that thread altogether would have been a better idea. Besides, even more than an Architect what was needed was some direction. I think he got that at some point.


----------



## brudgers (Jan 19, 2010)

Re: Building Separation



			
				John Drobysh said:
			
		

> brudgers - Stop trying to pick apart everyone elses' posts! You're not very good at it, constantly take things out of context, and only embarrass yourself in the process. My post, in its' entireity, was more a compliment than a slam - left-handed for the most part I'll grant you, but you make it so easy! No, it wasn't the best question ever asked, yes there was critical information lacking. Wouldn't it make more sense to either prod the additional information out of the OP or possibly wait for someone elses queries to do so? Even ignoring that thread altogether would have been a better idea. Besides, even more than an Architect what was needed was some direction. I think he got that at some point.


So far as I am aware, no state allows a non-professional to design a new educational occupancy of in excess of 9500 square feet (limitation for type VB).

So the OP either needs to be a design professional, or hire one.

In my experience, it's more expedient to hire one than to go through all the steps to become one.


----------



## SBerg (Jan 19, 2010)

Re: Building Separation

*LOCK *


----------



## texasbo (Jan 19, 2010)

Re: Building Separation



			
				brudgers said:
			
		

> John Drobysh said:
> 
> 
> 
> > brudgers - Stop trying to pick apart everyone elses' posts! You're not very good at it, constantly take things out of context, and only embarrass yourself in the process. My post, in its' entireity, was more a compliment than a slam - left-handed for the most part I'll grant you, but you make it so easy! No, it wasn't the best question ever asked, yes there was critical information lacking. Wouldn't it make more sense to either prod the additional information out of the OP or possibly wait for someone elses queries to do so? Even ignoring that thread altogether would have been a better idea. Besides, even more than an Architect what was needed was some direction. I think he got that at some point.


So far as I am aware, no state allows a non-professional to design a new educational occupancy of in excess of 9500 square feet (limitation for type VB).

So the OP either needs to be a design professional, or hire one.

In my experience, it's more expedient to hire one than to go through all the steps to become one.

1) You have no idea what the occupation of the OP is; the question is very much in line with what I've heard architects ask. Now maybe Alabama is the pinnacle of architectural excellence (as well as the paragon of surly plans examiners or whatever you do for a living), and you never get basic code questions from them, but my guess is that it has its share of less code proficient DP's just like everyone else.

2) Whether or not this state or that requires a DP is irrelevant; I'm not an astronaut, but that doesn't mean I can't ask a question about the space shuttle.

3) I laughed out loud when the OP put you in your place.

4) JD is right; you are embarrassing yourself, or at least you should be.


----------



## brudgers (Jan 19, 2010)

Re: Building Separation



			
				texasbo said:
			
		

> brudgers said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


1.  I don't care what the OP's occupation is because it's irrelevant to their need for an architect.

2.  You can ask, "Ok so I've got liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen and all I've got to do is take a cup of each and mix them together to make my rocket fuel, right?"  but nobody with any ethics is going to encourage you...particularly if your going to win your Darwin award in a school house.

3.  The OP responded to my posts to you rather than everyone else who asked for additional information...if it put me anyplace it was as correctly reading the OP.

4.  That's a classic.  Hope your reviews make more sense.


----------



## mtlogcabin (Jan 19, 2010)

Re: Building Separation



> Am I interpreting the ICC (2006) table 602 correctly in that I don’t need to rate the exterior wall of the new building? If not what am I missing


It was a simple question about interpreting table 602 and nothing else.

Give it up or Jeff will have to reward you

ihttp://www.energizer.com/ENERGIZER-BUN ... award.aspx


----------



## fatboy (Jan 19, 2010)

Re: Building Separation

There are other forums where this can be debated, it appears the thread has beeen answered to the satisfaction of the OP, and it's keeps straying away.


----------

