• 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 first logging in then clicking here: Upgrades

Is it a dead end corridor?

I would agree

If the offshoot is open to the corridor.


If I have to walk through a door to get to the offshoot,,,, Like in the examples posted,,,

Than no it is not a dead end issue

CDA, While I would normally agree with you, our local Fire Marshal received an interpretation from NFPA that says otherwise. NFPA interpretation said that inserting a door does not interrupt the length of the corridor and it does not eliminate the dead end issue. Before our State Fire Marshal received that interpretation (more than two years ago), they would advise folks to introduce a door with a sign "NOT AN EXIT". But that is no longer a solution.
 
Last edited:
CDA, While I would normally agree with you, our local Fire Marshal received an interpretation from NFPA that says otherwise. NFPA interpretation said that inserting a door does not interrupt the length of the corridor and it does not eliminate the dead end issue. Before our State Fire Marshal received that interpretation (more than two years ago), they would advise folks to introduce a door with a sign "NOT AN EXIT". But that is no longer a solution.


Well that sounds like a general interpretation !!!! I do not think the is code to back it up.

I could see if there is a lengthy corridor, and you just install one door across it, which would not allow egress in both directions, you could create a dead end issue.


So is the design to NFPA or IBC???? If IBC, than not sure how NFPA gets involved.

Plus, there is always the appeal process.


I mean you can walk into a lot of high rises, and walk down a corridor, with say multiple tenants on the same floor, each has a door to their suite, and say their suite is 70 feet deep.

Dead end corridor???? Even though they have a front door, to block people from coming in????

Anyway
 
So if you have a corridor with many doors along the walls that go into other corridors you would count them all as one corridor? The doors make the next corridor a separate enclosed exit access

CORRIDOR. An enclosed exit access component that
defines and provides a path of egress travel.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cda
unless two exits are required you cannot have a dead end corridor.
we use cross corridor doors all the time to eliminate dead end situations
 
So what is the point of the dead end corridor rule if you just need to add a door in the middle of a 100' long dead end corridor to make two 50' corridors?
 
So what is the point of the dead end corridor rule if you just need to add a door in the middle of a 100' long dead end corridor to make two 50' corridors?


So code consultants have a job and plan reviewers have to pause a minute.

Just like building a Building one sq ft less so a fire sprinkler system is not required
 
Should we require the doors that I mentioned above in post 31 to have automatic door closures without a hold open door device or would it OK to just leave them open. In other words are they still two separate corridors if the doors are always open?

I'm asking because I did a plan review where there was a dead end corridor over 50' long and I never thought of telling the designer that they could add a door in the corridor to make it two corridors.
 
Should we require the doors that I mentioned above in post 31 to have automatic door closures without a hold open door device or would it OK to just leave them open. In other words are they still two separate corridors if the doors are always open?

I'm asking because I did a plan review where there was a dead end corridor over 50' long and I never thought of telling the designer that they could add a door in the corridor to make it two corridors.

If exiting is required both ways, than:

Normally you need two doors

That swing in opposite direction


If only required one way

I would not allow the door holder and require self closing
 
I would not allow the door holder

Even if it was tied into the fire alarm system?


The fire alarm is not always activated, so if the mass plays follow the leader, they would could go down the dead end,,,,,

Since the door was open.
 
I would not allow the door holder and require self closing

I would like to require this but what section would I quote if I wanted to require this?

And why would't the same rule require for all doors into a corridor to have to be self closing?

CORRIDOR. An enclosed exit access component that
defines and provides a path of egress travel.
 
I would like to require this but what section would I quote if I wanted to require this?

And why would't the same rule require for all doors into a corridor to have to be self closing?

CORRIDOR. An enclosed exit access component that
defines and provides a path of egress travel.


You quote the dead end corridor section, and if they have a smart consultant, the consultant says, Hay can i use a two doors, that swing in opposite directions, or if it is to cut people off from, turning down a short section of corridor can i just put a door there....
You look at it, and if it gets rid of a dead end corridor, get the Stamp out.

And, since you are the approving person, approve it with no holder and self closing, or not approved.


Or if they need a hint, and you want to give it to them, to resolve the problem, drop the hint on how to fix it.
 
I would like to require this but what section would I quote if I wanted to require this?

And why would't the same rule require for all doors into a corridor to have to be self closing?

CORRIDOR. An enclosed exit access component that
defines and provides a path of egress travel.

"""And why would't the same rule require for all doors into a corridor to have to be self closing?""


Well if the door is not there to resolve a dead end issue, not required, and or,,, back to what some people are calling a "dead end condition"
 
I'm thinking of a plan review that I did before (B not sprinkled, one exit, 30 occupants, one 30' corridor down the middle with offices off of it, one exit at the end) and I did not think that they could divide a 30' corridor into two 15' corridors with just a door to make two separate corridors so the dead end would not be over the allowed 20'. I'm only asking because I am required to quote the sections of the code when doing a plan review. And if they are adding doors to divide a corridor into two corridors I would like to require auto door closer because I think it would be a good idea but I need to say where in the code it is required.
Why would 2 doors be needed to go both directions if the exit is only one way?
 
I'm thinking of a plan review that I did before (B not sprinkled, one exit, 30 occupants, one 30' corridor down the middle with offices off of it, one exit at the end) and I did not think that they could divide a 30' corridor into two 15' corridors with just a door to make two separate corridors so the dead end would not be over the allowed 20'. I'm only asking because I am required to quote the sections of the code when doing a plan review. And if they are adding doors to divide a corridor into two corridors I would like to require auto door closer because I think it would be a good idea but I need to say where in the code it is required.
Why would 2 doors be needed to go both directions if the exit is only one way?


I tried to put the disclaimer in

Yes if exit travel is only one way, than one door.

But normally a door is added to block access to a possible dead end.



Still do not think dead end applies here:::

“”” did before (B not sprinkled, one exit, 30 occupants, one 30' corridor down the middle with offices off of it, one exit at the end) and I did not think that they could divide a 30' corridor into two 15' corridors with just a door to make two separate corridors so the dead end would not be over the allowed 20'. “””
 
Sorry, I do not buy into the door in the middle diving the corridor into two halves..... the path of travel remains the same for egress, you didn't';t change a thing.


The length of the corridor is shorter


So walking off the corridor, the door being there takes away the dead end corridor issue.

Like a wall being there.

Thought is people would turnaround and not go through the door,,,

Especially if there was no exit sign above it.


If only one exit is required,,, I do not think there is a dead end corridor condition.
 
Top