"Ceiling" Height in Aquarium

[texasbo]

I would appreciate opinions from the group. We have a large aquarium (A-3) in plan review, with the typical underwater viewing tunnel. The tunnel is about 30' long, with an occupant load calculated at 5 square feet/person of around 45 people. The tunnel has 7'-2" headroom.

Both Ch 10 and 12 list a minimum headroom of 7'-6", with, in this case, non applicable exceptions.

I'd love to help them, but am having trouble finding any way to do so. Does anyone have any experience with this, or have any creative solutions other than redesign?

Thanks

 

[vegas paul]

Raise the tunnel, lower the floor? Kidding... By the way, if the "tunnel" is shaped with an arc-shaped top, the minimum ceiling height must be maintained for the entire required width of the means of egress, not just the peak. This may complicate the issue even more... Good thing you alerted them to this during the design/review phase, not during construction!

 

[Yankee]

I agree. And in that enclosed space the minimum headroom is even more important than an open room.

 

[north star]

* * *



FWIW, there is also a certain intangible at play here... a certain amount of

claustrophobia of being in a enclosed tunnel type environment. Not a "code"

issue, but a bigger, wider tunnel may help the marketing and use of the

facility long term.

* * *

 

[FyrBldgGuy]

Sprinkler heads should be easy to attach. Just drill a hole.

Head room, does that include all of those other things that stick down?

 

[texasbo]

Well, the tunnel is of course clear, so I'm not so sure they would get claustrophobia, but they WILL have sharks swimming around them!

Thanks for the replies. I'm not hearing anything I didn't think I'd hear, but if anyone knows of anything, please let me know.

 

[texasbo]

Sprinkler heads should be easy to attach. Just drill a hole.Head room, does that include all of those other things that stick down?

The code requires 7-6, but allows some minimum projections below that. However, this is basically just a clear plexiglass tube.

 

[technomaze]

the minimum ceiling height must be maintained for the entire required width of the means of egress, not just the peak. This may complicate the issue even more... Good thing you alerted them to this during the design/review phase, not during construction!

 

[Yikes]

Is it part of an exit path of travel from other spaces, or is it solely a destination?

 

[Yikes]

Could you utilize IBC 411, "special amusement buildings", and consider the tunnel to be the "conveyance device" (411.2) within the amusement building, rather than the building itself?

The extra features (exit markings, PA system, alarms) may provide an extra measure of life safety that may provide an equivalentcy / tradeoff for accepting for the lower headroom.

Last fall I was at the Sacramento railroad museum, an "A" occupancy building with a lot of rail passenger cars and engines inside the building. When you toured inside these rail cars, the headroom was less than 7'-6", but no one worried about safe exiting when inside the cars - -they were the "amusement experience"/walk-thru exhibit inside the building, not the building itself.

Likewise, the plexiglass tube, if not serving as means of egress for other spaces inthe building, could be just another amusement ride device.

 

[cda]

More then likely means if egress maintain 7' 6"

 

[peach]

If it's an amusement building, anything with wheels, or high rise.. start with Chapter 4.. always.

If it's under design, enforce chapter 10 .. unless there's in Chapter 4 to direct you otherwise.. if it's existing.. it is what it is!

 

[Yikes]

Is the tunnel some kind of prefab 2-meter tube? I still think there's a perspective that could treat this as either an amusement conveyance or even as a type of "furnishing" or object within the building proper... or a permanent underwater "boat" / recreational device within a pool.

Another perspective: how would this be philosophically much different than the recent thread on go-go cages? Or those giant "habitrail"-type tube slides at a Macdonald's playroom?

Remember, the OP is asking for creative solutions other than redesign.

Who is the manufacturer? Can you talk to their rep and find out how they have handled the life safety issues in other jurisdicitions?

 

[texasbo]

Is the tunnel some kind of prefab 2-meter tube? I still think there's a perspective that could treat this as either an amusement conveyance or even as a type of "furnishing" or object within the building proper... or a permanent underwater "boat" / recreational device within a pool.Another perspective: how would this be philosophically much different than the recent thread on go-go cages? Or those giant "habitrail"-type tube slides at a Macdonald's playroom?

Remember, the OP is asking for creative solutions other than redesign.

Who is the manufacturer? Can you talk to their rep and find out how they have handled the life safety issues in other jurisdicitions?

This is an old topic that somehow got resurrected recently, but yes, Yikes, that's pretty much what we did. The egress path was modified so that this viewing area was not a required part of the path, except for those who are actually in it, and it was approved. Good call.