A-5 Assembly Occupancy Appropriate for Canopy?

3/24/2025

My company just completed design/build construction of a canopy structure over a courtyard between two restaurant buildings located on the east & west sides.

We assigned an Occupancy Classification of A-5. The structure is all steel, other than the roof construction is comprised of the following layers: 22 gauge steel B deck, 7/16 inch OSB, 24 gauge metal standing seam. The standing seam contractor asked for a solid substrate, instead of metal to metal (Standing Seam attached to the B Deck.

We agreed to add the OSB. We examined the 2018 IBC and assessed that we could use the OSB. Our assessment concluded that the entire structure could be built with wood framing without sprinklers (A-5, no enclosures, height 37ft, 6,090 sf, Type V(A) Construction).

The AHJ shut us down and told us we needed to remove the OSB (combustible material).

What we didn't know was that the City and developer executed a Covenant Agreement that stipulated the Canopy was an A-3 Assembly occupancy. This was arranged because the developer didn't want the exterior restaurant walls to be fire-rated because of the ease of movement from the restaurant to the courtyard.

As a result, the OSB needs to be changed to fire-retardant-treated plywood.

Was the original classification of A-5 occupancy (which could have been wood) canopy assembly an acceptable approach?

Picture below, showing the galvanized steel deck.

Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

13 Comments

Chad

3/24/2025 07:58:48 am

What did you, or someone else do to tick off the FD?

That's a petty ask, IMO, after the fact. Although code correct, OSB, encased in metal is not a real hazard... again IMO.

Glenn Berger

3/24/2025 08:40:26 am

Assembly Group A-3 contains the "other assembly uses not classified elsewhere" provision.

Is the canopy just an elaborate sunshade or will there be planned activities below? The answer here will provide necessary assistance if A-5 could have been used.

Jerry

3/24/2025 08:49:50 am

The canopy roof top has a 97kW solar array. The solar was apart of the development approval. Activities beneath the canopy include table seating and NG fire pits with an occupant load of 100.

Ricardo Gonzales Jr

3/24/2025 09:00:37 am

When taking on a project, always ask what the Architect has defined the space as. As you learned later, the Architect had already defined the space with the Building Officials but appears they didn't pass that information to you or your team.
I agree with your assessment of an A-5 due to the quantity of people planned to sit or congregate underneath the shade, but the intent of A-3 is if it doesn't fit in the A-1, A-2, A-4 or A-5 categories neatly. This structure doesn't fit in any of them neatly, hence the choice for A-3 and to get away from having to rate the exterior wall.
Call this a lesson learned and add another question to your list of RFIs if the occupancies are not identified.

3/24/2025 09:18:20 am

The Covenant Agreement between the City and Developer (assigning the A3 Occupancy) occurred after we were presented our contract (no mention of A3). Additional question - an A5 assembly is the only assembly (A1 thru A5) that is considered open…is this correct?

3/24/2025 10:46:38 am

In my opinion, it would appear the closest set of Assembly that fits the situation. As with outdoor arenas, they have large shade overhangs for the spectators, and I would gander that they would have more than restaurant sitting going on. I've been to a few restaurants who had entertainment going on outside for the clients. They didn't have such a cool, statement, shade structure outside of their A-2 building. Far better than what the Romans were capable of with their coliseum.

Jack G

3/24/2025 09:17:46 am

Could you sell them on limited combustible.
The OSB is sandwiched between 2 metal layers ?
( like old building roofs)
So the material is combustible but it has a limited heat release ( 3500 but’s or less) . Build a test sample— send it to a lab… test per NFPA 259 I honestly don’t think the OSB could catch fire from below. ( open structure)
I would have built/ rated the front wall . ( on the restraurant);
Above indicated solar panels on the roof above it.
I was involved in a fire with roof top solar panels ( on a fully sprinklered building) . ( a million sq ft ) The building burned down. Perhaps this is why the AHJ wants it protected although if a fire were to start above, I believe the resultant would be the same even if protected with sprinklers.
( the fire fighter had problems with the solar array—- they don’t shut down, so water prohibited them from going on the roof— electrocution hazard)

Conrad

3/24/2025 03:29:00 pm

Missing info on occupant load, exiting, existing fire protection of the two buildings. However, probably not needed as there is an agreement specific to this location. It reads like the courtyard is being used for outdoor events/seating/overflow for the two restaurants. A 6,000 sq ft space can hold a lot of people. Depending on occupant loads, if the two restaurants share exit components with the canopy, it may require a fire sprinkler system.

3/24/2025 08:17:15 pm

The canopy space has an occupant load of 100. The 2 restaurants (A-2) are sprinkled. The north and south sides beneath the canopy are open (56ft wide). Only one restaurant can exit into the space beneath the canopy. Using IBC Chapter 10, Section 1005.1 Minimum Required Egress Width: using .2 inches (width) per occupant…assuming 1,000 occupants (actual combined total 1 restaurant + 100 beneath canopy…not even close to 1,000), this load would require (1,000 x 0.2)= 200 inches or 16’-8”.
By not informing me of the Covenant Agreement (A3 vs A5), I believe I’m justified a Change Order. I’m looking for Code justification.

Todd E Wyatt

3/24/2025 11:41:01 pm

Your statement ...

What we didn't know was that the City and developer executed a Covenant Agreement that stipulated the Canopy was an A-3 Assembly occupancy. This was arranged because the developer didn't want the exterior restaurant walls to be fire-rated because of the ease of movement from the restaurant to the courtyard.

... is not entirely accurate.

Group A Assembly (A-1 through A-5) is not required to be separated from one another with fire-resistant rated (FRR) assemblies. If the Design Professional wants to use "SEPARATED OCCUPANCIES", there is "no separation requirement" :

IBC-2018
Chapter 5 General Building Heights and Areas
Section 508 Mixed Use and Occupancy
508.4 Separated Occupancies
Buildings or portions of buildings that comply with the provisions of this section shall be considered as separated occupancies.
TABLE 508.4 REQUIRED SEPARATION OF OCCUPANCIES (HOURS)f
OCCUPANCY A
S (Sprinklered) : N = No separation requirement.
NS (Non-Sprinklered) : N = No separation requirement.

A "court" is defined as "an open, UNCOVERED space, unobstructed to the sky, bounded on three or more sides by exterior building walls or other enclosing devices." so this is not a "court."

The Occupancy Classification (OC) of the this structure shall meet the "formal designation of the primary purpose of the building."

A-2 ... intended for food and/or drink consumption
A-3 ... intended for worship, recreation or amusement and other assembly uses not classified elsewhere in Group A ...
A-5 ... intended for participation in or viewing outdoor activities including, but not limited to: Amusement park structures, Bleachers, Grandstands, Stadiums

Based on your explanation, the structure is classified as A-3 although it could have been classified as A-2.

The requirement for an automatic sprinkler system (ASPS) for an A-3 OC is per the following :

IBC-2018
Chapter 9 Fire Protection and Life Safety Systems
Section 903 Automatic Sprinkler Systems
903.2 Where Required
903.2.1 Group A
903.2.1.3 Group A-3
An automatic sprinkler system shall be provided throughout stories containing Group A-3 occupancies and throughout all stories from the Group A-3 occupancy to and including the levels of exit discharge serving that occupancy where ONE of the following conditions exists:
The fire area exceeds 12,000 square feet (1115 m2).
The fire area has an occupant load of 300 or more.
The fire area is located on a floor other than a level of exit discharge serving such occupancies.

IF this structure does NOT include one of these (3) conditions, an ASPS is not required.

The permissible use of OSB in the Roof Construction is based on the structure's Type of Construction (TC) per IBC-2018 Chapter 6 Types of Construction. Based on the photo, it appears it is a Type II Noncombustible TC :

IBC-2018
Chapter 6 Types of Construction
602.2 Types I and II
Types I and II construction are those types of construction in which the building elements listed in Table 601 are of noncombustible materials, except as permitted in Section 603 and elsewhere in this code.

Noncombustible materials (e.g. OSB) are permitted in Noncombustible TC but with limitations.

IBC-2018
Chapter 6 Types of Construction
Section 603 Combustible Material in Types I and II Construction
Combustible materials shall be permitted in buildings of Type I or II construction in the following applications and in accordance with Sections 603.1.1 through 603.1.3:
FIRE-RETARDANT-TREATED WOOD shall be permitted in:
1.3 Roof construction, including girders, trusses, framing and DECKING.

Based on Type II Noncombustible TC, OSB would not be permitted in the Roof Construction.

3/25/2025 05:33:41 am

Todd,
Your description and code reference's are greatly appreciated. Ty for the courtyard clarity. I’ve difficulty understanding the intent of the covenant agreement and the arbitrary assignment of an outdoor space to be an A-3 assembly. Not withstanding the adjacent restaurant structures, I assessed the canopy structure as an A-5 assembly. Is this a correct assessment? Thanks in advance

Paul Pinigis link

3/25/2025 11:28:20 am

I see no separation from the other structures; so these three structures appear to be one "building" in accordance with the IBC.

What is the construction type requirement for the whole building?

3/25/2025 02:24:50 pm

Paul,
Three (3) separate lots, with the two restaurants under separate leases. There is no physical attachment between the three structures.

A-5 Assembly Occupancy Appropriate for Canopy?

Leave a Reply.

ALL-ACCESS

SUBSCRIBE

COMMUNITY

YOUR POST

PE EXAM

FILTERS

ARCHIVES

PE PREP SERIES