Additional exit sign to non-required exit prohibited?

[msjenkin]

2nd floor office space, occupant load of 15. One exit required, 2-hr interior exit stairway provided.

We have an additional unrated exit access stairway. We showed an exit sign in corridor leading to this unrated exit access stairway. Reviewers are requiring that exit sign to be removed. This door will be unlocked but it is not a "required exit" so they are telling us to remove sign.

I see the exception in 1013.1 that says the exit sign is not "required" if only one exit is required, but is it prohibited? I understand the reasoning of directing occupants to the required rated exit stairway, but if we provide an additional unrated exit access stairway is it not safer to point occupants to that exit also?

 

[steveray]

I think the logic is not to send them to a non-compliant stair.....If it complies as an exit, I would have no issue with the sign being there....It gets a bit confusing sometimes down the road to determine which are the "required" exits if they all are signed, but whatever....That is what looking back at the plans should answer...

 

[RLGA]

Since you are from North Carolina, I am assuming the project is subject to the 2018 NCSBC.

Table 1006.3.2(2) states it is for stories with "one exit or access to one exit." Additionally, Table 1006.3.1 is for "Minimum Number of Exits or Access to Exits Per Story." In essence, you are complying with the latter, even though you are only required to comply with the former.

The second stairway is an exit access stairway and is permitted to be unenclosed per Section 1019.3, Exception 1. In fact, both stairs can be unenclosed per the exception, and both can (and should) be identified with an exit sign.

The door to the exit access stairs is an exit access door, per Section 1013.1, and thus, an exit sign is required.

 

[Mr. Inspector]

Is this an existing building? There may be some things about the second exit that does not comply with code and instead of making you do repairs to make it comply, the inspector just wants the exit sign removed.

 

[steveray]

Since you are from North Carolina, I am assuming the project is subject to the 2018 NCSBC.

Table 1006.3.2(2) states it is for stories with "one exit or access to one exit." Additionally, Table 1006.3.1 is for "Minimum Number of Exits or Access to Exits Per Story." In essence, you are complying with the latter, even though you are only required to comply with the former.

The second stairway is an exit access stairway and is permitted to be unenclosed per Section 1019.3, Exception 1. In fact, both stairs can be unenclosed per the exception, and both can (and should) be identified with an exit sign.

The door to the exit access stairs is an exit access door, per Section 1013.1, and thus, an exit sign is required.

Unless it's not required:

 

[RLGA]

Unless it's not required:

View attachment 14966

Exit signs are not "required" to be provided per the exception, but that does not mean they cannot be provided for additional exits or access to exits. The question was whether the exit sign was prohibited, and I am saying it is not. Exception 1 does not prohibit the installation of any exit signs--it only offers leniency by not requiring an exit sign when only one exit or exit access is permitted. If someone wanted to install exit signs for every single room in the building, they could (it would be crazy, but it is not forbidden).

 

[steveray]

Exit signs are not "required" to be provided per the exception, but that does not mean they cannot be provided for additional exits or access to exits. The question was whether the exit sign was prohibited, and I am saying it is not. Exception 1 does not prohibit the installation of any exit signs--it only offers leniency by not requiring an exit sign when only one exit or exit access is permitted. If someone wanted to install exit signs for every single room in the building, they could (it would be crazy, but it is not forbidden).

We agree then...I misunderstood...

 

[RLGA]

We agree then...I misunderstood...

Although an exit sign is not technically required for either means of egress since the space is permitted to have a single exit or access to a single exit, it might be wise to install exit signs for both when easy to do so now should the occupant load increase in the future due to a change in use. This assumes the story is large enough to accommodate a higher occupant load in the future.

 

[jar546]

2nd floor office space, occupant load of 15. One exit required, 2-hr interior exit stairway provided.

We have an additional unrated exit access stairway. We showed an exit sign in corridor leading to this unrated exit access stairway. Reviewers are requiring that exit sign to be removed. This door will be unlocked but it is not a "required exit" so they are telling us to remove sign.

I see the exception in 1013.1 that says the exit sign is not "required" if only one exit is required, but is it prohibited? I understand the reasoning of directing occupants to the required rated exit stairway, but if we provide an additional unrated exit access stairway is it not safer to point occupants to that exit also?

I would install the exit sign on the non-rated stairwell in this (what I assume) existing building. If someone starts a fire in the rated stairwell, people need to know where to go. I understand they want to direct people to the "better" option, the fact is, there are two.

 

[Yankee Chronicler]

I would install the exit sign on the non-rated stairwell in this (what I assume) existing building. If someone starts a fire in the rated stairwell, people need to know where to go. I understand they want to direct people to the "better" option, the fact is, there are two.

What if the path of egress travel using the non-rated ("Not an exit") stair exceeds the allowable path of travel? If it's not a rated exit enclosure, the path of travel has to include the travel distance to the stairway, down the stairway, and to the exit discharge door.

 

[RLGA]

What if the path of egress travel using the non-rated ("Not an exit") stair exceeds the allowable path of travel? If it's not a rated exit enclosure, the path of travel has to include the travel distance to the stairway, down the stairway, and to the exit discharge door.

Only one exit has to be within the maximum travel distance. I am assuming the enclosed exit stairway is well within the maximum travel distance.

 

[steveray]

Although an exit sign is not technically required for either means of egress since the space is permitted to have a single exit or access to a single exit, it might be wise to install exit signs for both when easy to do so now should the occupant load increase in the future due to a change in use. This assumes the story is large enough to accommodate a higher occupant load in the future.

Agreed...mostly...CT limits exit access stairs to 10 people...because fire...and I have a little discomfort with an exit sign on a non-compliant "exit"...But if it is not needed, it serves zero occupant load....

1019.3​

In other than Group I-2 and I-3 occupancies, floor openings containing exit access stairways or ramps that do not comply with one of the conditions listed in this section shall be enclosed with a shaft enclosure constructed in accordance with Section 713.

1. 1.In buildings equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 903.3.1 with other than Group H or I occupancies, exit access stairways and ramps serving an occupant load of less than 10 not more than one story above the level of exit discharge.

 

[Mr. Inspector]

I see, the IBC only tells use where exit signs are required, it does not tell us anything about where you cannot install them. So, you could put an exit sign anywhere you want, like at a window, a permanently locked door or outside of a closet door. An inspector cannot make you remove these exit signs.

 

[steveray]

I see, the IBC only tells use where exit signs are required, it does not tell us anything about where you cannot install them. So, you could put an exit sign anywhere you want, like at a window, a permanently locked door or outside of a closet door. An inspector cannot make you remove these exit signs.

Imma call BS on that...as the whole point is to mark the path to and the exit....It can't be misleading....

1013.1​

Exits and exit access doors shall be marked by an approved exit sign readily visible from any direction of egress travel. The path of egress travel to exits and within exits shall be marked by readily visible exit signs to clearly indicate the direction of egress travel in cases where the exit or the path of egress travel is not immediately visible to the occupants.

 

[Yikes]

I see, the IBC only tells use where exit signs are required, it does not tell us anything about where you cannot install them. So, you could put an exit sign anywhere you want, like at a window, a permanently locked door or outside of a closet door. An inspector cannot make you remove these exit signs.

That is true.
The opposite is also true: You could have a code-required exit door with a code-required exit sign, and the code does not prohibit it from being surrounded with 10 other signs that say "not an exit", and wallpaper graphics that say "not an exit, go elsewhere" in 1000 places. (Heck, I think there was even a clothing retailer named "no exit".


No one claims this is best practice, and no one is claiming this is safe. In the event of a harmful incident that is traced back to intentional misdirection, there's probably civil liability and (depending on intent) criminal negligence.

But the purpose of the code is to establish minimum [and mostly prescriptive] requirements to safeguard public health, safety and welfare via a governmental approval process related to construction. Following the minimum prescriptions of code does not guarantee that the public has been safeguarded.
Typically IBC 104.3 gives the building official authority to render interpretations to specific situations in accordance with the intent of the code. One would hope in the situations described above that the official could extrapolate design and code intent to require removal of a misleading exit sign from a non-exit closet door, etc.

 

[Yikes]

From https://www.boredpanda.com/the-absurd-sign-projects/

 

[Yankee Chronicler]

Only one exit has to be within the maximum travel distance. I am assuming the enclosed exit stairway is well within the maximum travel distance.

Fair point. If the one required exit wasn't within the allowable exit access travel distance, it wouldn't be the only required exit. [:duh:]

Since the codes are minimum standards, nothing prohibits designing and building something that's better than the minimum. In reality, most buildings tend to be at least somewhat better in some respects. Say your exit access travel distance is allowed to be 200 feet. When's the last time you saw a building where the actual exit access travel distance measured exactly 200 feet?

So if a designer provides two means of egress where only one is required, I can't think of anything in the code that would prohibit installing exit signs pointing occupants toward both exits.

 

[Mr. Inspector]

When it comes to accessibility if it is a new or complete change of occupancy and the nonrequired second exit is not an accessible egress and it has an exit sign you would need a directional sign to the accessible exit or just take the exit sign(s) off.

 

[Yankee Chronicler]

When it comes to accessibility if it is a new or complete change of occupancy and the nonrequired second exit is not an accessible egress and it has an exit sign you would need a directional sign to the accessible exit or just take the exit sign(s) off.

Why?

Suppose it's a building with a large occupant load, requiring three or four exits. The code says

1009.1 Accessible means of egress required. Accessible
means of egress shall comply with this section. Accessible
spaces shall be provided with not less than one accessible
means of egress. Where more than one means of egress is
required by Section 1006.2 or 1006.3 from any accessible
space, each accessible portion of the space shall be served by
not less than two accessible means of egress.

So even if I need four means of egress, only two have to be accessible means of egress. Yet all four would have to be marked as exits by exit signs.

 

[Mr. Inspector]

Why?

Suppose it's a building with a large occupant load, requiring three or four exits. The code says



So even if I need four means of egress, only two have to be accessible means of egress. Yet all four would have to be marked as exits by exit signs.

I thought we were talking about a small space that only required one exit.

 

[Yankee Chronicler]

I thought we were talking about a small space that only required one exit.

We are. But if a larger space with four required MOE only needs two to be accessible and the non-accessible MOE still have to be marked with Exit signs, in a smaller space with two MOE why can't the second be marked with an Exit sign?

 

[Yikes]

So, you could put an exit sign anywhere you want, like at a window

From your lips to Home Depot’s ears:

 

[steveray]

From your lips to Home Depot’s ears:
View attachment 14983

Looks like some ICE Cali electricians....

 

[Mr. Inspector]

We are. But if a larger space with four required MOE only needs two to be accessible and the non-accessible MOE still have to be marked with Exit signs, in a smaller space with two MOE why can't the second be marked with an Exit sign?

I did not say it could not. But when it comes to accessibility, if it is a new or complete change of occupancy and the nonrequired second exit is not an accessible egress and it has an exit sign you would need a directional sign to the accessible exit or just take the exit sign(s) off.