• Welcome to The Building Code Forum

    Your premier resource for building code knowledge.

    This forum remains free to the public thanks to the generous support of our Sawhorse Members and Corporate Sponsors. Their contributions help keep this community thriving and accessible.

    Want enhanced access to expert discussions and exclusive features? Learn more about the benefits here.

    Ready to upgrade? Log in and upgrade now.

Corridor continuity

I

iBuild

Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2012
Messages
2
I am working on an existing assisted living community where the owners desire to open completely 2 existing units to the egress corridor and make it an activity area/ dining room.

The building is 12-story Type 3 construction and fully sprinklered. This modification would happen on the 4th floor. The village has adopted the IBC 2006

I see that section 1017.5 is pretty straightforward in that it does not allow anything other than lobbies/reception areas to be open to corridors.

I am confused because I have worked in many other assisted living communities, primarily 1 and 2-story Type 5 construction, which have all kinds of dining rooms, public living rooms, etc. open to the corridors.

My question: Are there any circumstances/ exceptions in the code that would allow me to open areas to the corridor in existing assisted living (I-1) occupancy?

Thank you all very much!
 
Welcome to the board.

The IBC only requires that the corridor only connect to one of the required exit stair enclosures. The second exit can be accessed through the day room if a door is provided from the day room to the corridor. The door separating the day room, dining room or other space can be on hold open. The commentary gives good examples.
 
iBuild said:
I am working on an existing assisted living community where the owners desire to open completely 2 existing units to the egress corridor and make it an activity area/ dining room.The building is 12-story Type 3 construction and fully sprinklered. This modification would happen on the 4th floor. The village has adopted the IBC 2006

I see that section 1017.5 is pretty straightforward in that it does not allow anything other than lobbies/reception areas to be open to corridors.

I am confused because I have worked in many other assisted living communities, primarily 1 and 2-story Type 5 construction, which have all kinds of dining rooms, public living rooms, etc. open to the corridors.

My question: Are there any circumstances/ exceptions in the code that would allow me to open areas to the corridor in existing assisted living (I-1) occupancy?

Thank you all very much!
Click to expand...
Would an open area adjacent to a corridor and constructed as a corridor be considered an intervening room? If it was less than 20' deep is it an issue?
 
"""""an activity area/ dining room.""""

I think the concept is fine, but th use is not equal to a foyer, lobby, or reception area.
 
Thank you for your comments.- Coug DadI looked up the commentaries for IBC 2003 (the only one I was able to find) but could not see the examples you are referring to. Where should I look?In my case there won't be another exit through the day room. -RLGA, steveray, RapioI guess the building is not a type 3, I apologize. Concrete frame with brick/block exterior infill. Still learning these things. It is in the village of Oak Park, IL.-cdaNFPA 101 is part of the village code. -imhotepI second the question. If the room is less than 20' (which it is not) can the space be used for other-than-egress purposes?Here is the building I am working with:View attachment 1293 The idea is to open 412 to the corridorHere is a fairly recently constructed assisted living building that has the openings:View attachment 1294How are they able to do it in Building 2?Thank you!

View attachment 559

View attachment 560

View attachment 559

View attachment 560

/monthly_2012_04/572953c3b2787_Building1.jpg.399d9643868ff10e31df99389610d448.jpg

/monthly_2012_04/572953c3b5cd9_Building2.jpg.9eaec0cf82e5afdf99802bc3d83df19a.jpg
 
iBuild said:
Thank you for your comments.- Coug Dad

I looked up the commentaries for IBC 2003 (the only one I was able to find) but could not see the examples you are referring to. Where should I look?

In my case there won't be another exit through the day room.

-RLGA, steveray, Rapio

I guess the building is not a type 3, I apologize. Concrete frame with brick/block exterior infill. Still learning these things. It is in the village of Oak Park, IL.

-cda

NFPA 101 is part of the village code.

-imhotep

I second the question. If the room is less than 20' (which it is not) can the space be used for other-than-egress purposes?

Here is the building I am working with:

View attachment 1293

The idea is to open 412 to the corridor

Here is a fairly recently constructed assisted living building that has the openings:

View attachment 1294

How are they able to do it in Building 2?

Thank you!
Click to expand...
I'll come back to what I consider the operative provision: "...interrupted by intervening rooms." An exit passageway shall not be used for any purpose other than a means of egress, but the same provision is not found under corridors. If the rec area is bounded by fire partitions and the depth is less than 2.5 times the least width then it meets the dead end exception and is allowed. One would have to address the mechanical requirements.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
In the IEBC in other than A or H occupancies W/sprinkler a new dead end coridor can be 50'. IEBC 705.6 ex #4
 
In a thread not to many days ago I brought up the question of a not-a-corridor. If travel distance requirements are met to the vertical exit enclosures then why does the interveening space have to be called a corridor?
 
My answer would be no

Mainly because of what they are trying to use the room for

As for the other building can't say why, maybe code was not enforced??
 
cda said:
Why can't they gut the room and leave the walls and door???
Click to expand...
Why should they if it is an interveening room not a corridor.

cda said:
My answer would be noMainly because of what they are trying to use the room for

As for the other building can't say why, maybe code was not enforced??
Click to expand...
Again Why call it a corridor if they meet travel distances.
 
imhotep said:
Last edited by imhotep; 2 Hours Ago at 14:25. Reason: 'Cause I can
Click to expand...
very nice. Hospitals Adult Care Centers and Dormitories do this all the time, and I do not see this as an exit passageway or a dead end corridor. As long as they are not encroaching on the required egress widths, I have no problem. Maybe delineating the space with a change in ceiling & floor materials, or even a half wall and bulk-head would help.
 
My thinking is along the same line as Papio's. The code says that corridors can't be "interrupted," so if the space is off to the side so that the corridor path is consistent from one end to the other (i.e. not interrupted) and the space is constructed as for corridors, then I would be okay with it.
 
My thinking is along the same line as Papio's. The code says that corridors can't be "interrupted,"so if the space is off to the side so that the corridor path is consistent from one end to the other

( i.e. not interrupted) and the space is constructed as for corridors, then I would be okay with it.
Click to expand...
What some on here may be concerned about is the integrity of the existing corridor; as well

as, a different Occupancy Group use associated with a rated corridor and the ability to

egress from the interior spaces. Suppose a fire event originates in this "new" activities

/ dining area. Now the rest of the corridor is compromised! ..or am I missing something?

Also, along the same lines as "cda", why couldn't the two rooms be gutted and leave the

existing corridor walls & doors in place?
 
OP lists it as an I-1

so one hour corridor required

as stated above::

"""""an activity area/ dining room.""""

I think the concept is fine, but the use is not equal to a """""""""""""foyer, lobby, or reception area.""""""""""""""""

not sure what nfpa 101, which they may also have to meet says
 
so everyone agrees with corridor continuity

and that is has to be maintained till you get out of the building

just down to what can be allowed to be open to this exit system

so for those that would aloow the dining room in a rated corridor, would you allow it if it was in the same stairwell eclousure that the corridor dumps into, if it was out of the exit width???? same exiting system as you have in the corridor on the floor where you would allow trhe dining room open ot the rated corridor
 
If the layout for the building were a bit different and the dining room was a more traditional space such as a big hall with sleeping rooms all around a central eating area then no one would even try to call it a corridor. You would all simply look for CPOT and travel distances and leave it at that.

I may be crazy but if I can (IBC 1014.3) travel 75' through 1, 2, or more spaces and then find more than one direction to travel to an exit enclosure, and if I do all of this within (IBC T1016.1) the 200' allowed travel distance for exit access; then why do I have to make a space comply with the definition of a corridor if I am allowed to travel through (IBC 1014.2) an intervening space?

If the designer calls the whole open area between all the dwelling areas a dining room, not a corridor but a dining room, and then provides the proper smoke protection for the area in front of the elevator, who are we as reviewers to say he has to call it a corridor and meet the restrictions of a corridor. The doors to the rooms will need to be rated because each dwelling unit is required to be separated, but other than that and smoke protection there is no reason the designer cannot call the whole area what he wants.
 
If the designer calls the whole open area between all the dwellingareas a dining room, not a corridor but a dining room, and then provides the

proper smoke protection for the area in front of the elevator, who are we

as reviewers to say he has to call it a corridor and meet the restrictions of

a corridor. The doors to the rooms will need to be rated because each

dwelling unit is required to be separated, but other than that and smoke

protection there is no reason the designer cannot call the whole area

what he wants.
Click to expand...
The existing floor plan has the corridor listed and wants to change the

use of the two rooms off to one side, not change the existing corridor, but

rather, IMO, ..add to it (i.e - compromise the entire corridor).

Again, just asking, but why can't the designer also just leave the

corridor intact and gut the two rooms. Why open up the rooms to the

corridor?

"gb", as code officials, it is, IMO, prudent to ask such questions along

the "most restrictive" lines. Peoples lives and other resources are

involved.

iBuild,

FWIW, because it has been done in other buildings / floors does

not make it code compliant in this application.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top