access through intervening "spaces"

[Papio Bldg Dept]

I have a B (8k sf) and S-1 (6.5k sf) occupancy Tenant Finish permit in for review. Both Occupancies are separated by a service core/mezzanine, but neither spaces have two exits that meet the 1/3 diagonal rule. Am I off track by not allowing them egress through the other occupancy space or should I be allowing it as they are not high-hazard occupancies. Occupant load is 108 combined, and egress would need to travel through the shared break room as there is no separated corridor connecting the two different occupancies.

Any help or advice would be greatly appreciated in this matter.

 

[Architect1281]

One Company with multiple or mixed occupancy classifications? or Seperate Companies that would have access through anothers space?

 

[lunatick]

I have a B (8k sf) and S-1 (6.5k sf) occupancy Tenant Finish permit in for review. Both Occupancies are separated by a service core/mezzanine, but neither spaces have two exits that meet the 1/3 diagonal rule. Am I off track by not allowing them egress through the other occupancy space or should I be allowing it as they are not high-hazard occupancies. Occupant load is 108 combined, and egress would need to travel through the shared break room as there is no separated corridor connecting the two different occupancies.Any help or advice would be greatly appreciated in this matter.

I will cite 2009 section numbers.

Building needs 2 exits.

It has 2 exits.

Next question, do the spaces require 2 exits?

The S, can be exitted throught the B. there is nothing in 1014 (exit access) that puts this into question.

Issue is for the B.

Can 1015 (exit and exit access doorways) be applied here to the B?

No, I am assuming it has an occupant load of 80 (or greater than 49)

What of 1025 (horizontal exits)?

 

[Builder Bob]

IF you allow transition of people from one side to the other, I would suggest not locking hardware, signage indicating door must be available for use as an exit at all times......... and if the wall is a rated wall, how would you meet the requirement of latching hardware required by NFPA 80... especially since the door may have to have the ability to swing in both directions.

 

[Papio Bldg Dept]

I will cite 2009 section numbers.Building needs 2 exits.

It has 2 exits.

Next question, do the spaces require 2 exits?

The S, can be exitted throught the B. there is nothing in 1014 (exit access) that puts this into question.

Issue is for the B.

Can 1015 (exit and exit access doorways) be applied here to the B?

No, I am assuming it has an occupant load of 80 (or greater than 49)

What of 1025 (horizontal exits)?

Is the S-1 more, equal or less hazardous than the B? If it was an S-2 compared to a B which would be more hazardous and therefore not comply with intervening space requirement?

Currently, there are two exits for each space but they do not meet the 1/3rd diagonal rule, so then I was looking at the service section (bathrooms, breakroom, conference room with a mezzanine above) that separates the two occupancies and wondering if the break room could be considered an accessory space to egress through. In my mind it seems reasonable. Then I asked whether the S-1 would be accessory and qualify for exception to the egress through intervening spaces. In that regard, I lean towards not accessory by any definition I can think of and I have no guarantee that there will be a clear and delineated means of egress through that space.

 

[globe trekker]

Papio,

Is there any way for you to upload a sketch/drawing of your question?

.

 

[Papio Bldg Dept]

View attachment 623

pretty small so not sure if this will work for an image but better than nothing i guess. maybe you can get a general idea from it.View attachment 623

/monthly_2012_12/572953c5402d1_Mixed-OccEgress.jpg.03c86d34bfbc46d0f5572d7a078e584e.jpg

 

[lunatick]

Is the S-1 more, equal or less hazardous than the B? If it was an S-2 compared to a B which would be more hazardous and therefore not comply with intervening space requirement? Currently, there are two exits for each space but they do not meet the 1/3rd diagonal rule, so then I was looking at the service section (bathrooms, breakroom, conference room with a mezzanine above) that separates the two occupancies and wondering if the break room could be considered an accessory space to egress through. In my mind it seems reasonable. Then I asked whether the S-1 would be accessory and qualify for exception to the egress through intervening spaces. In that regard, I lean towards not accessory by any definition I can think of and I have no guarantee that there will be a clear and delineated means of egress through that space.

Again, not knowing which version you are using.

Citing 2009, looking at table 508.4. If this is S-1. I would interpret this is an akin level of concern (I hate to use hazard as it can confuse).

Looking at your image, I wasn't able to make out all of what is going on. But it appears that the back of house accesses the front of house through the employee lounge. That the restrooms are part of and access through the front of house. I also cannot quite make out what is all going on in the restrooms. They appear to maybe have showers? they appear wider than necessary for a restroom.

My preference would be to have a corridor (not necessarily rated, unless required) for which the lounge/restrooms are accessed. And the S used for egress through the B.

The S though, with or without a fixture plan, looks to be too to allow egress through to this door.

My preference would be to see an exit out of the B near this common core area.

Last, the training room. does this need a second exit?

 

[Papio Bldg Dept]

Thanks lunatick. I am under the 2006 IBC currently. There is no fire separation required between B & S-1, so I am not requiring a corridor. The break room/employee lounge offers a direct path of travel through the room. Being that the space is going to be used as an intervening space for a means of egress, I am requiring emergency lighting and exit signage. The training room has two means of egress and I required the second means of egress to be revised for direction of travel (difficult to see in the thumbnail pic I posted - sorry). The core area can be accessed from both non-separated occupancies. I still have questions about clearly demarcated means of egress through a storage space, but they have revised their exits to meet the diagonal rule. I have personal preferences for how I would like the MOE to occur, but it meets the minimum code requirements.

thanks again for the feedback.