Board debate centers on whether intended food/drink use triggers A2 classification

The hearing turned on whether the applicants' stated intent — including outside catering and on-site event staff — should be read as "intended for" food and drink and therefore align the venue with an A2 occupancy under the code. Sean, representing the building/inspection perspective, read definitions and said inclusion of catering staff in occupant calculations indicates an A2 intent; he cited code commentary and definitions distinguishing banquet halls and community halls.

Committee members countered that small, privately managed downtown event venues commonly include occasional food or drink but functionally act like smaller A3 assembly spaces. One member said such venues are "not a banquet hall" in the ordinary sense and argued the practical reality of the footprint and staffing made the space better suited to A3. The board ultimately sided with the applicants' presentation and classified the space as A3, but members directed staff to coordinate with fire on enforcement and safeguards should owners seek a reduced occupant load in the future.