1003.6 Corridor Obstructions

[texasbo]

What is all the time? Benches? Are you saying benches is all the time?

 

[mark handler]

What is all the time? Benches? Are you saying benches is all the time?

Clear POT....

 

[Papio Bldg Dept]

Isn't the doors in a series requirement to prevent interference?So given this example, where would it end? is the person sitting a man, woman, child? are they crossing their legs, slouching?

The best example I can think of, and this is different from the seating example mark is posting, is a hallway service (walk-up counter). Typically your hallway is around 5' wide, if not wider, and there is often a que (i was reading the Palaearctic-African Songbird Migration forum again and i get a bit british). This que can often times encroach into the minimum required accessible means of egress component, in this case path of travel. In this instance, do we assume as in the diagram that mark provided, if the corridor is 36" wide, could not the bench be fronted on the edge of that width. The code says that the clear width shall be provided, and unobstructed, but does not clarify what, or whom, it considers to be an obstruction, let alone whether they are seated or standing.

I would think, when I have my designer hat on, it would be slightly irresponsible to not consider occupant congestion/obstruction in corridors and its effects on the means of egress system. As mark stated, the means of egress is not only for emergencies, it is also intended for access too.

Last I checked, the code does not cover sit-ins either, benches or nor benches. But an accessible bench will also need to be provided when you provide those wood fixed benches.

 

[mark handler]

1018.3 Corridor obstruction. The required width of corridors shall be unobstructed.

Clear and simple, it does not say when the bell is ringing and lights are flashing .All the time, all obstructions.

 

[texasbo]

I would think, when I have my designer hat on, it would be slightly irresponsible to not consider occupant congestion/obstruction in corridors and its effects on the means of egress system.

That is taken care of by occupant load calculations and required exit width. If you are willing to consider a sitting person an obstruction, what gives you the authority not to consider a walker an obstruction, or to give you a visual, a couple of fat chicks walking side by side?

 

[texasbo]

1018.3 Corridor obstruction. The required width of corridors shall be unobstructed.Clear and simple, it does not say when the bell is ringing and lights are flashing .All the time, all obstructions.

I agree, and by all means, I suggest keeping those benches out of the required corridor width.

 

[rooster]

If a seated person needs to move for a person to use the Corridor they are an obstruction. The code cannot define every obstruction, the code book would be the size of the library of congressThe code book relys on the person using it to have some sense, not common sense

I think the operative word in this statement is "move." The users of a building are assumed to be alive and able to move (unless it's a hospital or a morgue, which I'm sure would have their own sets of requirements).

 

[Papio Bldg Dept]

That is taken care of by occupant load calculations and required exit width. If you are willing to consider a sitting person an obstruction, what gives you the authority not to consider a walker an obstruction?

Are you talking about egress width, or exit width? An open gymnasium at maximum standing occupancy (1/5sf) would then have an obstructed means of egress?

I agree, and by all means, I suggest keeping those benches out of the required corridor width.

I think the question now, is not the benches being in the required corridor width (unless I missed something, everyone agrees a bench is an obstruction), but rather the people sitting in them.

 

[texasbo]

Are you talking about egress width, or exit width? An open gymnasium at maximum standing occupancy (1/5sf) would then have an obstructed means of egress?

I thought we were talking about corridor width here? I don't understand your reference to a gymnasium, but occupant load calculations determine required widths (above the minimum dimension), so yes, it would take care of itself regardless of what exit component you're talking about.

I think the question now, is not the benches being in the required corridor width (unless I missed something, everyone agrees a bench is an obstruction), but rather the people sitting in them.

Yes, I understand. I was trying to ignore the fact that we're actually discussing the proposition of human beings constituting a corridor obstruction...

 

[High Desert]

Yes, I understand. I was trying to ignore the fact that we're actually discussing the proposition of human beings constituting a corridor obstruction...

I'm gonna sic the fire marshal on that slow guy in the hallway the next time he obstructs my ability to find the exit.

 

[Francis Vineyard]

Appreciate the clarifications; the path of egress travel (POT) in the 1st sentence of 1003.6 is the minimum required width portion.

Benches, tables, vending machines are permitted but they have to be non-combustibles; and assuming the code requires they be fixed.

Mark H. brought up a good point about accessibility; if they have benches; chairs or tables then 1109.10 (1109.11 – 2006) applies even though it’s in a corridor?

And if the corridor is 8’ wide; which in this instance it is, and the required width is 44 inches; then objects can be placed on each side of the corridor walls with the POT down the center (similar to 1028.4)?

 

[texasbo]

I'm gonna sic the fire marshal on that slow guy in the hallway the next time he obstructs my ability to find the exit.

And the two fat chicks are getting citations.

 

[texasbo]

Appreciate the clarifications; the path of egress travel (POT) in the 1st sentence of 1003.6 is the minimum required width portion. Benches, tables, vending machines are permitted but they have to be non-combustibles; and assuming the code requires they be fixed.

Mark H. brought up a good point about accessibility; if they have benches; chairs or tables then 1109.10 (1109.11 – 2006) applies even though it’s in a corridor?

And if the corridor is 8’ wide; which in this instance it is, and the required width is 44 inches; then objects can be placed on each side of the corridor walls with the POT down the center (similar to 1028.4)?

That's obviously my opinion, but there are clearly others here, whose opinions are sound, who disagree. Mark does make a good point about the handicapped accommodations.

 

[Papio Bldg Dept]

Yes, I understand. I was trying to ignore the fact that we're actually discussing the proposition of human beings constituting a corridor obstruction...

More than understandable. I was simply going along for the ride myself. The gymnasium example was in reference to what your were trying to ignore...and my reasoning for why hbs being obstructions bordered on ridiculous in terms of code, but has some merits when it comes to design and function of a space. I am currently reviewing a trampoline dodgeball occupancy where the users will wait in line outside the dodgeball room for their turn to play. No seating provided, just a standing cue. The free jump room holds an 80+ occupant load, and users will also wait outside for their turn. The corridors are 10', but still, it isn't hard to imagine some congestion. I wouldn't call them an obstruction however.