# Occupant load vs means of egress question



## rth (Mar 26, 2013)

ICC IFC 2006 = adopted code

Existing building, old library, 9,710 square footage gross, max occupancy based on 1004.1.1 tabe = 194 (worst case scenario). Egress capacity is 650,

changed to dance hall, same gross square footage, based on 1004.1.1 now occupancy exceeds egress capacity, A-3 > 300 capacity must be sprinkled. Some are saying post occupancy of 300 unsprinkled, others say sprinkle building and post occupancy of 650, others are saying sprinkle the building and make egress capacity meet or exceed occupancy per 1004.1.1.

What is correct?

Thanks,

Richard


----------



## cda (Mar 26, 2013)

maximum requirements should apply, change of use

how are you invovled in this?


----------



## fatboy (Mar 26, 2013)

Current use of space drives the requirements. If the OL requires the installation of a sprinkler system, additionalexits, then it is what is is.


----------



## mark handler (Mar 26, 2013)

Are they installing sprinklers?

If so. post the greater number.

If Not, post the lower number.


----------



## Frank (Mar 26, 2013)

Change of use from library to dance hall will bring in a raft of requirements.  Is this a dance hall with music and drink aka nightclub?  Toilet facilities, exits and sprinklers are all considerations as well as potentially height and area, and accessibility issues.


----------



## fatboy (Mar 27, 2013)

"If Not, post the lower number."

And this will accomplish what? So the BO can say "it was posted" after a incident?

Thanks, but no thanks.


----------



## steveray (Mar 27, 2013)

No penciling the load down.....worst case governs....set by square feet and use of space, then you deal with sprinklers and MOE.....not the other way around....


----------



## jj1289 (Mar 27, 2013)

I agree with steveray.  The code does not allow you to reduce the occupant load lower than the calculated number.


----------



## cda (Mar 27, 2013)

Exception: Where approved by the building official, the actual number of occupants for whom each occupied space, floor or building is designed, although less than those determined by calculation, shall be permitted to be used in the determination of the design occupant load.


----------



## JPohling (Mar 27, 2013)

Doubtful a BO will stick his neck out like that for a nightclub.  I would not


----------



## north star (Mar 27, 2013)

*= $*





> "Exception: Where approved by the building official, the actual number of occupants for whom eachoccupied space, floor or building is designed, although less than those determined by calculation, shall be
> 
> permitted to be used in the determination of the design occupant load."


This may be another case where the BO is directed to let it go!I believe that it is election time in Central Mississippi..........Not the

best time to be ruffling feathers [ i.e. - revenue streams ] with

trivialities such as adopted building & fire codes.

*$ =*


----------



## rth (Mar 27, 2013)

cda said:
			
		

> Exception: Where approved by the building official, the actual number of occupants for whom each occupied space, floor or building is designed, although less than those determined by calculation, shall be permitted to be used in the determination of the design occupant load.


Where in 06 IFC did you find this?


----------



## fatboy (Mar 27, 2013)

1004.1.1 Exception


----------



## cda (Mar 27, 2013)

Ibc 2009..

That's it 1004.1.1

Same section on 06 ibc


----------



## tmurray (Mar 27, 2013)

cda said:
			
		

> Exception: Where approved by the building official, the actual number of occupants for whom each occupied space, floor or building is designed, although less than those determined by calculation, shall be permitted to be used in the determination of the design occupant load.


We have the same exception here in Canada, but we also require the occupant load to be posted when this exception is used.


----------



## alanmurfee (Apr 4, 2013)

I would recommend making use of the maximum requirements and installation of sprinkler systems, additionalexists, etc. This could work out and that should be sufficient.


----------



## FM William Burns (Apr 5, 2013)

Little late but agree with those who indicate the "change in use" dictates the egress capacity, arrangement of exits and fire protection requirements in accordance with the adopted code that pertains to changes in use


----------

