Can Multiple Exits Use the Same Egress Court / Exit Discharge?

[JCG_architect]

I am working on a mixed-use building design on an urban infill lot (neighboring buildings on all 3 sides) that is 50 feet wide and 100 feet deep. I would like to create a long skinny building tight to one side of the property and have all the exits come out into the court that is left on the other side. ie: instead of having a 30 foot wide building in the middle of the lot with a 10 foot yard on each side, I'd like to push the building to one side so I have a 20 foot yard / court on one side only. Ideally I would like both building exits (it's a 4 story building) to come out into the same court that leads to the public right of way. I can't find anything in the code that establishes a requirement for the separation of exits at the point of exit discharge, or anything about whether exits can share a common court. The building will be subject to CBC 2022.

CBC 1022.2.2 says: 'Exterior exit doors shall lead directly to the exit discharge or the public way.'

CBC 1028.2 says: 'Exits shall discharge directly to the exterior of the building.'

CBC 1028.5 says: 'The exit discharge shall provide a direct and unobstructed access to a public way.'

CBC 1029 is all about egress courts, and establishes minimum widths such as 44" or as required for exiting width...but doesn't mention if multiple exits can share it.

I was always taught that the CBC is a 'permissive' code, meaning if it doesn't say you can't...then you can. Based on the above sections it would appear that sharing an egress court is allowable. However I must admit that it seems slightly questionable given that it forces people from both exits to go through the same area to reach the right of way. I would expect there to be some minimum width requirement in order to be allowable. But perhaps the fact that you are outside means that smoke concentration should not be an issue, and the fire department will be able to see and assist you?

Has anyone run into this before, or have a noter code section that might shine some light on it?

Thanks,

 

[bill1952]

If 2 MOE required, I believe it's fine if you can get to public way to front and rear. Not ok if only to front.

 

[JCG_architect]

Hi bill1952, In this scenario you can only get to a public way from one end. While I understand the assumed logic inherent in your reply I can't find any code sections that makes that point explicit, and defines the relevant conditions. Is there a code section you can provide to support your belief? Or an ICC ruling?

Consider this: If the exit discharge / egress court were 100 feet wide I think it's safe to say it would be ok for both exits to use it to reach the public way at one end. If it were 50 feet wide I still doubt many would object to it being acceptable. How about 30 feet wide? You see the point. At some apparently undefined width we start to think about it differently.

Is there anything in the code that clarifies this question?

 

[bill1952]

You might get away with it but the possibilities for a 20' wide court being blocked by a single incident seems risky.

Off hand, I don't know if there is a separation requirement for the exit discharge.

 

[Genduct]

In our City there are two Codes that control the Site Design: Building Code AND Zoning Code. Unfortunately, these Codes are not Coordinated

If your Zoning Code believes your Design is in "Context" with Abutting and Adjacent Buildings, then a plan that effectively Fronts to the "Side yard" (Courtyard) seems to make sense to me

 

[JCG_architect]

Hi Genduct, yes we always have to comply with both City Zoning Ordinance and State Buidling Codes as well. I'm really looking for clarity on the building code aspects of the proposed scenario. As a licensed design professional it's essential that my designs meet the letter and intent of the code and ensure occupant safety. Most of the time the code is pretty clear...you just have to find all the relevant code sections.

I'm still hoping someone out there can point me towards another code section or perhaps something in an interpretive manual that will clear this up. If not I may have to just take it up with the local building official.

 

[RLGA]

There is no requirement to separate the exit discharge. Multiple exits can discharge into a single egress court. At this point, the occupants are safely out of the building. The intent of the exit discharge is to move the occupants to a safe location quickly. Discharging multiple exits into a single egress court is not a problem as long as the width accommodates the combined total of all occupants egressing through the egress court. For multi-story buildings, this would be based on the story that provides the largest number of occupants egressing through the egress court (also take into consideration convergent occupant loads from basements).

Now, here is where things get complicated. If the egress court also provides other functions besides egress, then the outdoor area must be provided with an occupant load and means of egress in accordance with Chapter 10 (CBC Section 1004.7). Thus, a court that provides sufficient width for a pathway and not much else, is purely an egress court and needs only to comply with CBC Section 1029. If the court includes a playground, a swimming pool, or other function beyond a mere pathway, then exits from that outdoor area shall be of sufficient width and number per Chapter 10.

 

[Genduct]

Hi Genduct, yes we always have to comply with both City Zoning Ordinance and State Buidling Codes as well. I'm really looking for clarity on the building code aspects of the proposed scenario. As a licensed design professional it's essential that my designs meet the letter and intent of the code and ensure occupant safety. Most of the time the code is pretty clear...you just have to find all the relevant code sections.

I'm still hoping someone out there can point me towards another code section or perhaps something in an interpretive manual that will clear this up. If not I may have to just take it up with the local building official.

JCG, this is the situation where the Bldg Code Official earns their money by Discerning the INTENT of the Code
You need only present what I think is a reasonable interpretation and let the BCO decide

RGL's explicit post seems to have all the info you need

 

[Missionbrew1]

Hi Genduct, yes we always have to comply with both City Zoning Ordinance and State Buidling Codes as well. I'm really looking for clarity on the building code aspects of the proposed scenario. As a licensed design professional it's essential that my designs meet the letter and intent of the code and ensure occupant safety. Most of the time the code is pretty clear...you just have to find all the relevant code sections.

I'm still hoping someone out there can point me towards another code section or perhaps something in an interpretive manual that will clear this up. If not I may have to just take it up with the local building official.

If the combined occupant load of the building does not exceed 49, then 1 exit is required, and the gate to the Public Way ( if there is one) need not swing in the direction of travel.