AITA? Storage building exits

[Inspector Gadget]

Had an application come in for an industrial building. >600m2 (>6000 ft2 for you murricans).
Canadian Code requires this floor are to have more than one exit (outward swinging door).
Designer pushing back, with the declaration the "actual" area will be far less because sand/salt will be stored in the structure, and it's low human occupancy.
Received the "We've done a dozen of these in the province, never had to do this anywhere else" line.

The way I see it, the floor area is clearly defined as outside wall to outside wall - independent of what's inside. The structure requires two exits. It exceeds the 200m2 limit under Part 3 for one exit, simple and easy.

Part 2, which deals with farm buildings (low human occupancy) has the same criteria, btw., so "low human occupancy" doesn't act as the get out of the second exit free card, even if used as a reference/alternative solution. (And it's not a farm building in any event.)

Thoughts?

 

[Yankee Chronicler]

Had an application come in for an industrial building. >600m2 (>6000 ft2 for you murricans).
Canadian Code requires this floor are to have more than one exit (outward swinging door).
Designer pushing back, with the declaration the "actual" area will be far less because sand/salt will be stored in the structure, and it's low human occupancy.
Received the "We've done a dozen of these in the province, never had to do this anywhere else" line.

The way I see it, the floor area is clearly defined as outside wall to outside wall - independent of what's inside. The structure requires two exits. It exceeds the 200m2 limit under Part 3 for one exit, simple and easy.

Your view would be correct under the IBC and, assuming the Canadian Building Code has a similar definition for building area, you are correct and the designer is blowing smoke. The designer's view is a lot like saying that the "actual" area of an 80,000 square foot supermarket is really only 20,000 square feet because 60,000 square feet are occupied by shelves and products. That's not how this works.

"I've been doing it this way for thirty years."

"Then you've been doing it wrong for thirty years."

 

[Inspector Gadget]

"I've been doing it this way for thirty years."

"Then you've been doing it wrong for thirty years."

This is why I always give code references with a ruling. In this case I spat back the definition of floor area and asked the designer how is interpretation meshed with the definition.