Thanks. The corridor makes sense to me in that example. But what if the floor has several other spaces such as janitor closets and utility rooms, etc assigned to floor common? Now the building common area (ie mechanical rooms in your example) are getting grossed up by the additional floor common area and a portion is getting paid for by all tenants. There isn't a clear relationship between the utility room and the mechanical room like there is between the corridor and mechanical room. To me at least. It seems like it's being called usable for the sake of the math (gross-up), not because it's actually able to be used differently. Does 2010 make any clearer distinctions? Thanks,
I have a question about the 1996 BOMA standard regarding building common vs floor common areas. When calculating floor usable area, building common is included but floor common is subtracted. (correct?) I don't understand why this is so. As a tenant, i can't put employees or furniture within these building common spaces. Why is it still considered part of usable? Am i putting too much emphasis on the tenant when thinking about 'usable'? With a few exceptions, i generally think of usable area as similar to plannable/assignable. Anything you can offer to help clarify my confusion would be appreciated.