Bridge/catwalk spanning over egress court allowed?

[MPal27]

Has anyone worked on a project where a bridge/catwalk (that serves as a hall on upper residential floors) was allowed to span across the side of an egress courtyard that abuts to a public right of way? I'm thinking this is not allowed since the bridge inhibits the court from being "open to the sky", thus no longer rendering that space as an egress court? I'm curios if there are exceptions if the bridge is open versus enclosed. Thanks!

Photo at https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=901050561045&l=a93185e95a

 

[cda]

welcome

 

[cda]

http://media.iccsafe.org/news/eNews/2013v10n19/2012_ibc_handbook_p27.pdf

What is you code section that says you cannot do it??

The walk way might be considered part of the building.

2012 commentary if you do not have one::

http://diberville.ms.us/home/wp-con...C-Code-And-Commentary-Volume-I_Compressed.pdf

 

[ADAguy]

I have done similar bridges spanning atriums where it connected staircases on each side with an elevator in the Atrium. They counted the entire structure as one building without requiring 2 stairs for each wing. Fire marshall signed off on it to my surprise.
Is the bridge/catwalk open to the sky? Can you provide a plan?
How is the b/c protected if it is intended to be an egress hall?

 

[Yikes]

Perhaps the egress area under the bridge would be considered an "exit passageway"?

 

[mtlogcabin]

COURT. An open, uncovered space, unobstructed to the sky, bounded on three or more sides by exterior building walls or other enclosing devices.
YARD. An open space, other than a court, unobstructed from the ground to the sky, except where specifically provided by this code, on the lot on which a building is situated.
obstruct

[uh b-struhkt]

• Synonyms
• Examples
• Word Origin

See more synonyms on Thesaurus.com
verb (used with object)
1.
to block or close up with an obstacle; make difficult to pass:
Debris obstructed the road.
2.
to interrupt, hinder, or oppose the passage, progress, course, etc., of.
3.
to block from sight; to be in the way of (a view, passage, etc.).


Does the walkway provide 5% or 50% obstruction?
You can take the literal application which would mean no protrusions/obstructions of any kind such as eave overhangs or you can seek out the "intent" of this code section and maybe have some options to work.

IMHO I would choose the latter.

 

[cda]

What is you code section that says you cannot do it??

 

[cda]

http://media.iccsafe.org/news/eNews/2013v10n19/2012_ibc_handbook_p27.pdf

 

[Yikes]

I remember the old "UBC Q&A Code Applications Manual" showed a doughnut shaped multistory building with a center court that is open to the sky as the doughnut hole, and the two required exit stairs discharging into this court/doughnut hole. The text said "it is assumed that the exit court will exit to the front and rear by means of exit passageways as required by section 1010.1". This was back in the old '94 UBC, but wouldn't the concept remain similar?

Another approach: Check and see if there is a way to call your court simply a "court", not an "exit court". In other words, see if it can still be part of the "exit access" or "exit", but not called "exit discharge". That way it can be serviced by an exit passageway, which is the space under your bridge.
Note that emergency escape windows from your residential bedrooms are required to open directly onto a (1) public way, or (2) yard or (3) court that opens to a public way. It doesn't say "exit court", it just says "court".