• Welcome to the new and improved Building Code Forum. We appreciate you being here and hope that you are getting the information that you need concerning all codes of the building trades. This is a free forum to the public due to the generosity of the Sawhorses, Corporate Supporters and Supporters who have upgraded their accounts. If you would like to have improved access to the forum please upgrade to Sawhorse by first logging in then clicking here: Upgrades

Corridor Egress

The corridors are the "exit access." I disagree with requiring the corridors to have two exits. The spaces that are being provided with "exit access" meet CPET, overall travel distance, etc. Steveray I'm not sure which code edition you're using but Exit Access and Exit Doorways are in Section 1015 in both the 2009 and 2012 editions, not 1014. By adding the occupants that are already provided with two separate paths to two separate exits is contrary to the basic tenet of means of egress. You are required to provide the minimum number of exits from the occupied spaces via exits, exit access or exterior doors. You have done that by providing "exit access corridors" that in turn provide access to the minimum number of exits required by the code. The corridor has to meet the minimum width based on the occupant load served and be fire-resisteve if required by Section 1018. By requiring two exits from the "exit access corridor" you are now requiring four exits from spaces that only required two.That's double dipping IMHO.

Section 1015 says:

1015.1 Exits or exit access doorways from spaces. Two exits or exit access doorways from any space shall be provided where one of the following conditions exists:

1. The occupant load of the space exceeds one of the values in Table 1015.1. ( what occupancy is a corridor? Are you going to call it an A occupancy? B occupancy? I call it the exit access because it's not typically occupied except for exit access.)

2. The common path of egress travel exceeds one of the limitations of Section 1014.3. (you've already met CPET when you left the assembly ares. Now you're down to overall travel distance, which is 250 feet from Table 1016.1)

3. Where required by Section 1015.3, 1015.4, 1015.5, 1015.6 or 1015.6.1. ( It's none of those)

Anyway, that's my take on it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
JMHO

A single exit corridor is nothing more than a cattle chute leading the cows to slaughter.

This is on a second floor. Once the theater occupants enter the corridor they will no longer be able to exit that space except for the one exit that is provided

Table 1018.1 clearly defines the

OCCUPANT LOAD SERVED BY CORRIDOR

In this case it is 225 people.

1018.4 Dead ends. Where more than one exit or exit access doorway is required, the exit access shall be arranged such that there are no dead ends in corridors more than 20 feet (6096 mm) in length.

What would require more than one exit in a corridor?

The occupant load being served might be one or the creation of a dead end might be the other reason.
 
= + = + =

What is the actual Occ. Load using each corridor, including

the theater staff & all others ?

+ = + = +
 
A 'dead end' means no way out. If I got to the end of the corridor that has no exit door, I could go through the theatre on the end and egress through the other side.

IMHO, no dead end.
 
HD....2003 still (that is usually what I post because they are the sections I am familiar with)....If in fact they can reenter one of the other theaters, I might buy it...SCENARIO: Car hits 1 Exit discharge and is on fire...where do 225 (or more) people go? The CPET and OL qualifiers are based on just this type of situation where loss of one path to an exit can not cause a "major" catastrophe....IMO
 
JBI said:
A 'dead end' means no way out. If I got to the end of the corridor that has no exit door, I could go through the theatre on the end and egress through the other side. IMHO, no dead end.
Click to expand...
Most theaters will use panic hardware that is locked on the non-egress side to prevent "customers" from jumping from one movie to another without paying or even consider it a security measure since the Aurora CO incident.
 
Well, as others can attest to, I am not necessarily the "voice of reason", at first glance I thought that since there were two exits out of the space, great. After looking at the image, I'm inclined to say, no, add a second exit in the corridor.
 
fatboy said:
Well, as others can attest to, I am not necessarily the "voice of reason", at first glance I thought that since there were two exits out of the space, great. After looking at the image, I'm inclined to say, no, add a second exit in the corridor.
Click to expand...
And the reasoning?
 
High Desert said:
And the reasoning?
Click to expand...
If you can not re-enter the theater then you have a dead end corridor

A dead end exists whenever the user of the corridor has only one direction to travel to reach any building exit.

If you can re-enter the theater to access the second exit then I would agree the corridor can lead to one building exit.
 
mtlogcabin said:
If you can not re-enter the theater then you have a dead end corridorA dead end exists whenever the user of the corridor has only one direction to travel to reach any building exit.

If you can re-enter the theater to access the second exit then I would agree the corridor can lead to one building exit.
Click to expand...
So in other words, if the entire corridor length does not exceed 20', the single corridor exit be sufficient?
 
I believe that the common path of travel and the dead end corridor provisions of the code are the kickers for this design. Even if the corridor is not a space, this general provision would not allow this design 1005.5.

1005.5. Distribution of egress capacity.

Where more than one exit, or access to more than one exit, is required, the means of egress shall be configured such that the loss of any one exit, or access to one exit, shall not reduce the available capacity to less than 50 percent of the required capacity.

The exit is the door leading to the out side, if this door is blocked, the egress capacity is reduced to less than 50 %.... the door swing does not allow people to back track...... the simple solution would be to install a corridor along one of the theaters to allow flow of traffic in both directions in the newly "Interconnected" corridors.

BTW, I don't belive these are corridors since they are not required to be fire protection rated in an assembly.....
 
mtlogcabin said:
If you can not re-enter the theater then you have a dead end corridorA dead end exists whenever the user of the corridor has only one direction to travel to reach any building exit.

If you can re-enter the theater to access the second exit then I would agree the corridor can lead to one building exit.
Click to expand...
would say if the corridor itself requires two ways out, the dead end provison comes into play

If a corridor only requires one way out, the dead end provison does not come into play

I think the term "corridor" is hanging people up
 
So last Saturday while waiting to see what was not as good of a movie as I had hoped with my family I observed the following;

-There were +/-60 people standing outside of each (5) of the various theater entrances served by the exit access.

-They provided benches and queue area along the sides of the exit access for patrons to sit/stand while waiting for the completely full theaters' current showing to finish and empty into that space thus doubling the occupant load if based upon number of seats alone.

Then, halfway through the showing of our movie the Fire Alarms began sounding, strobes went off (true story) and everyone slowly at first started getting up to leave and a bottle neck effect ensued at the exit heading back to the exit access. I calmly walked to the exterior exit with my family and stepped outside, I think maybe 3 people followed us? When I walked back in from outside inquiring about a refund I was told that since I left I couldn't get a refund. That's when the situation went sideways. In the end I got the refund and learned that a burst sprinkler pipe from the extremely cold weather caused the alarm.

What I learned-

-Occupant loading based upon number of fixed seats in these occupancies is not adequate for exiting.

-Exclude "waiting/queue areas" from exit access width determinations.

-The exit access should have two exits if necessary based upon occupant load.

-Ask for the manager immediately when dealing with cinema staff.

ZIG
 
You mean half the people did not go out one exit and the other half go out the other exit????

Instead of the dancing popcorn and cell phones, they need to put building code sections on the movie screen
 
cda said:
Instead of the dancing popcorn and cell phones, they need to put building code sections on the movie screen
Click to expand...
Don't forget to add the following to the end of the video / slides: "These building code sections are brought to you by a Building Codes Forum sawhorse. Please consider donating."
 
mtlogcabin said:
If you can not re-enter the theater then you have a dead end corridorA dead end exists whenever the user of the corridor has only one direction to travel to reach any building exit.

If you can re-enter the theater to access the second exit then I would agree the corridor can lead to one building exit.
Click to expand...
I would agree with that mtlogcabin.
 
mtlogcabin said:
If you can not re-enter the theater then you have a dead end corridorA dead end exists whenever the user of the corridor has only one direction to travel to reach any building exit.

If you can re-enter the theater to access the second exit then I would agree the corridor can lead to one building exit.
Click to expand...
If you have exit access to two exits, than the corridor leads to two exits.
 
you would install dual egress doors at all of the theater exits to allow swing in the direction of egress for this "second exit" back thru the theater? Just do it correctly and provide a compliant second exit from the corridor.
 
JPohling said:
you would install dual egress doors at all of the theater exits to allow swing in the direction of egress for this "second exit" back thru the theater? Just do it correctly and provide a compliant second exit from the corridor.
Click to expand...
The installation of dual egress doors with appropriate exit signage,emergency illumination, aisle width, and accessibility could meet code.... this woul meet the minimum code requirements. Never said that it would be the most logical solution..........just a possible solution.
 
My thoughts

Two exits are required from the unrated corridors.

The exit access from any room or area should have direct access to an exit. Section 1014.2 provides exception egress through intervening space or rooms with three basic conditions. Space or room is accessory to area served; egress is not through high hazard occupancy; and a discernible path of egress.

This leads me to believe this design is no-compliant I do not believe you can egress through the adjoining theater to eliminate the dead end corridor requirement. Also if the corridor doors are blocked you are forcing people to exit through the adjoining theater.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top