AC 038 - How to figure out the allowable area for a single occupancy building.

[@wahidyuqob2016]

I consider you to be one of the top teachers and architects for anyone looking to present their work in a professional manner.

[@archicorner]

Thank you!

[@marekpula1]

You make my job so much easier. These codes get so confusing and I am an architect, not a lawyer. Thank you!!

[@muhammadaleem1868]

It really cleared the doubts and helped to understand the logic behind it in an easy way.

[@archicorner]

Thank you Muhammad! I appreciate all your comments!

[@dadaw9909]

Thank you! it's so helpful and straightforward!

[@archicorner]

You're welcome!

[@ankitdarda]

At 19.45 min on your video. Table 506.3.3 column says 25 to less than 30 so isn’t you should only consider those perimeter lengths and not more than 30’? But you also considered building frontage more than 30’ as well while calculation? Please correct if not but that's how I read this table

[@eugene831]

I also read the table this way. The scenario for ‘25 feet or greater’ is not available. @archicorner Can you please clarify? 19:12

[@ivey232]

this is so helpful! thank you! Question - in the example given for the frontage calculations (9:45) , the north open space shows trees. Would this be an issue in considering this an open space accessible for the fire department needed to access to fight a fire? Are there landscaping limitations?

[@archicorner]

Not that I am aware of.

[@tabitadaolio4991]

Thank you for the video! But I really need help. The new 2021 definition of 'At' for equation 5-1 doesn't include SM, however, we're supposed to use this equation for allowable area of each story. If we have a 2 story sprinklered building, what do we use for 'At' in the equation? We aren't an NS type. Per 2018 IBC, we could use SM and it would make sense. Now it's very unclear for 2 story sprinklered buildings what the max FA for the building would be.

[@lizzic6207]

So if you look at 506.2.1, it will actually define everything there. Notice under "NS" that it notes in parentheses that you use this figure, whether or not your building is sprinklered. So let's say you have a 2 story building, VB, sprinklered. Then your equation is Aa=At+(NSxIf). At is 27000, and NS is 9000. So Aa=27000+(9000xIf). Having If be zero will cancel our everything and make Aa equal 27000. Hope that clears it up.

[@kelvinngdesign]

does that included the existing building area if we are doing a expansion? and does that included the existing building area if we are relocating the existing historical house? can you explain the frontage formula if i excessed my allowable building area?

[@ephemeralcreek]

Yes, you do have to include the existing house or any house that is within the sphere of influence. You can have several buildings that you have to add together if they are close enough. If the house is historical, you may be able to get away with more, but typically you are not allowed to make a legal nonconforming building less conforming. Ultimately you should check with the building official in your jurisdiction. The web is ripe with bad information and this possibly includes my comments - HA!

[@mdr245724]

when will you be talking about Chapter 7 ?

[@boie2262]

I enjoyed this video but I have a question. The new code states this; The frontage increase shall be based on the smallest public way or open space that is 20 feet (6096 mm) or greater, and the percentage of building perimeter having a minimum 20 feet (6096 mm) public way or open space. In your example this would be the north P/L with 25'?

[@archicorner]

Please let me know what code you are referring to. The example in the video references the 2021 IBC, which to my knowledge, is the most recent version of the IBC. Also, if possible, let me know what code sections you are referencing. Thanks for leaving a comment!

[@boie2262]

@@archicorner .I copied that code portion off the 2021 IBC 506.3.2. (ICC Website)

[@eer928]

@@archicorner Thank you for the video. any update to this comment?

[@ephemeralcreek]

You sir are correct, you have to use the smallest open space dimension. You can't pick and poke around the table to see what lets you add the most. At least that is how I interpret it. The code should make it more clear really. Here is the code reference from CBC 2022 which is based upon the IBC. I work and am licensed in Cali., thus the CBC. Here is the quote from the code: "The frontage increase shall be based on the smallest public way or open space that is 20 feet (6096 mm) or greater, and the percentage of building perimeter having a minimum 20 feet (6096 mm) public way or open space." And if 25% or more of your perimeter does not comply with open space, you can't use that area increase. Table 506.3.3.1 gets even more confusing....good stuff!

[@joshhemmerlein6956]

OMG thank you so much

[@archicorner]

You are welcome!

[@designereats3661]

Great video

[@0manhattan1]

Thank you soo much... very helpful

[@archicorner]

Glad it was helpful!

[@CerimaTrucking]

Good job

[@archicorner]

Thanks

[@eduardorubio6551]

Nice work

[@archicorner]

Thanks!

[@piezoification]

THE BEST!

[@archicorner]

Thanks!

[@laiguana4658]

how did you get 0.42 for I-f factor? shouldn't it be 0.53?

[@archicorner]

I am unsure of what portion of the video you are talking about, but those numbers are referenced in table 506.3.3, which is discussed in the video at around minute mark 17:00. If this is not what you are referring to, please provide the minute mark of the section of the video you have questions about please. Thank you for watching!

[@robloxvids2233]

The .53 or 53% number is what he used to locate the correct row from 506.3.3, in this case being the row that says "50 to less than 75", which is wherein 53% falls.

[@SOBluTiger]

@@archicorner You have not answered the question, and I have the same one. I don't get this either. How did you calculate the .42 number that you plugged into table 506.3.3 @ 19:45? I understand that 53% helped you locate the correct row. But how did you come up with .42 that you wrote in the table?

[@elhammohammadi4055]

Perfect

[@khomwitboonthamrongkit2173]

Great vdo

[@archicorner]

Thanks!

[@hikolyou]

great

[@archicorner]

Thanks 😊

[@kshakman]

Your rock....

[@archicorner]

Thanks!

[@activetransport4311]

Thanks,

[@archicorner]

You're welcome!

[@SAbdelmessieh]

On this example why using open space 25 to less than 30 feet section of the table on 38’ and 110’ open spaces ? Both are greater than the 30 feet max !

[@archicorner]

The video shows an example with both options. One uses the “greater than 30” option as you noted. It simply shows the difference between more open space and more open building perimeter. Having more open building perimeter is often better than less open building perimeter even if the open space is more than 30 feet as shown by the example comparisons in the video.

[@nataliasanchez1265]

@@archicorner I think what Sherief is asking is about the second option you show - if the column says "25 to less than 30" feet of open space (not "25' or more"), then wouldn't we only count the North side with 25' open space? It seems like the 110' and 38' options wouldn't apply to that column because they are not between 25' to 29'.

[@raminparsa9267]

@@nataliasanchez1265 You are absolutely right. This guys walked me through but in the end he messed it up with a lot of confusion

[@juanadiaz6661]

Super 👍🏻.

[@archicorner]

Thank you 👍