1. ATTENTION returning members. If you are coming here from the old forum for the first time, you will need to reset you password. However, we had an email problem getting password reset links set out to a lot of the email addresses. That problem is temporarily rectified but IF you still have an issue, email me direct at info@thebuildingcodeforum.com and I will give you a temporary password.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. 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 clicking here: Upgrades
    Dismiss Notice

California - Minimum plumbing fixture calculations

Discussion in 'Plumbing Codes' started by JPohling, Nov 19, 2018.

  1. JPohling

    JPohling Sawhorse

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2011
    Messages:
    826
    Likes Received:
    52
    I have a multi occupancy tenant improvement where we are trying to calculate the minimum plumbing fixtures that are required. I have proposed using the ratio method where each occupancy is calculated separately. This generates a fractional number for the fixtures. Once each occupancy is calculated and generates its own fractional number all of the occupancies are totaled and then rounded up to the next higher number to establish the combined minimum fixture count.

    This is the method that Ron, RLGA has described in his code corner article #33, fall 2010. This was for IBC

    I am having a difficult time with a jurisdiction saying that this ratio method is per Chapter 29 of the CBuildingC which has not been adopted by California as well as this jurisdiction. It seems to me like the language regarding minimum plumbing fixtures in the 2016 CPlumbingC has the same language where the multiple occupancies are summed and then rounded up.

    Am I missing something? There must be a way to use a ratio rather than just adding up more and more fixtures for each separate occupancy.
     
  2. mark handler

    mark handler Sawhorse

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2009
    Messages:
    9,770
    Likes Received:
    579
    2016 CPC
    T422.1.... For multiple occupancies, fractional numbers shall be first summed and then rounded to the next whole number.

    You round up to the next whole number, not down to the closest number
     
  3. JPohling

    JPohling Sawhorse

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2011
    Messages:
    826
    Likes Received:
    52
    Mark, I absolutely agree.
    I am being told that I cannot use the ratio method for a multiple occupancy project because this jurisdiction and California in general has not adopted chapter 29 of the CBC.
    Essentially they want me to satisfy each occupancy with whole numbers using no ratios. As an example I have an A2 with 209 males and 209 females. For females 209 would require 6 water closets. 6 water closets will satisfy up to 300 females. I also have B occupancy and S occupancy that will have an additional 16 occupants, 8M and 8F. instead of being able to use a ratio and satisfy my requirement for the B and S with the 6 total water closets they are requiring that I provide 6 for the A2 and additional toilets for the B and the S sending the total way up.

    I do not see anywhere in chapter 4 of the CPC that eliminates the ability to use the ratio method? On the contrary the language that I have pointed them too and which you highlighted would suggest that the ratio method for multi occupancies is allowed.
     
  4. ADAguy

    ADAguy Sawhorse

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2013
    Messages:
    2,623
    Likes Received:
    227
    Big city or small city jurisdiction?
     
  5. mark handler

    mark handler Sawhorse

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2009
    Messages:
    9,770
    Likes Received:
    579
    The quote I provided is from the CPC not the CBC Chapter 29
    I know of a lot of cities in CA that do not allow the use of chapter 29 of the CBC.
     
    #5 mark handler, Nov 20, 2018
    Last edited: Nov 20, 2018
  6. JPohling

    JPohling Sawhorse

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2011
    Messages:
    826
    Likes Received:
    52
    I agree.

    ADAguy this is a large city
     
  7. JPohling

    JPohling Sawhorse

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2011
    Messages:
    826
    Likes Received:
    52
    Bump! anyone have any additional insight?
     
  8. mark handler

    mark handler Sawhorse

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2009
    Messages:
    9,770
    Likes Received:
    579
    It is the duty of the building official to interpret the code. The only thing you can do is talk to his boss, or do as he says. Nothing anyone here can say will override the AHJ of the project. Bump.
     
  9. RLGA

    RLGA Sawhorse

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2009
    Messages:
    1,375
    Likes Received:
    369
    They’re obviously not interpreting the CPC (UPC) correctly. You can challenge their interpretation by taking it to the next level or you can “Ask a Code Question” via the IAPMO website (http://www.iapmo.org/Pages/AskACodeQuestion.aspx) and present the response to the building department.
     
  10. Master Pipe

    Master Pipe Registered User

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2018
    Messages:
    2
    Likes Received:
    0
    The minimum number of plumbing fixtures ..Calculate the occupant load for the existing building prior to the addition.
     

Share This Page