Egress From Private Garage

[thomasfagan]

I am working on a cottage cluster development in Oregon. There will be 8 detached single family homes on their own lots. There are 2 detached garages, each with 4 enclosed bays on a common lot. Each bay is small, occupant load of 1 or 2. Garages are type U - private garage. I am wondering if it will be possible to use the overhead garage doors as egress door?

1010.1.2 exception 1 seems added to allow this, however not sure if I will run into problems in other areas of 1010... hardware, latches, ect.

The garages will also have man doors. However these will open up to the units back yards... connecting them to public way is not desirable. Regardless they do provide a practical second option for exiting the garage.

 

[Yankee Chronicler]

Just to be sure we're all on the same page -- the dwellings are single family residences so they are designed under the IRC, but you are designing the garages under the IBC?

Can the garages be private garages and use group U if they aren't on the same parcel as the dwelling units?

 

[Sifu]

2018 IBC 1010.1.2 commentary:

Examples of the doors permitted in Exception 1 are
overhead garage doors and horizontal sliding doors.
Exception 1 allows doors other than the swinging
type for the listed uses where the number of occupants
is very low.

I have done a lot of these types of garage buildings this way, however they required accessible parking so that changed things for those units. Don't think that is an issue for what you describe.

 

[Joe.B]

Just to be sure we're all on the same page -- the dwellings are single family residences so they are designed under the IRC, but you are designing the garages under the IBC?

Can the garages be private garages and use group U if they aren't on the same parcel as the dwelling units?

Not all states require single family to be built under the residential code. California gives the designer the option. CA has added the following to the Residential Code:

1.1.7.3.1 Detached one- and two-family dwellings.
Detached one- and two-family dwellings, lodging houses, live/work units, townhouses not more than three stories above grade plane in height with a separate means of egress, and their accessory structures may be designed and constructed in accordance with this code or the California Building Code, but not both, unless the proposed structure(s) or elements) exceed the design limitations established in this code, and the code user is specifically directed by this code to use the California Building Code.

The Building Code has a similar addition. Prior to the creation of the ICC, California codes were based off the Uniform Building Code. There was no residential code. Many applicants here still don't even understand what the residential code is or why it's there. They design their single-family homes to the building code. I suspect that Oregon is the same.

 

[thomasfagan]

Not all states require single family to be built under the residential code. California gives the designer the option. CA has added the following to the Residential Code:

1.1.7.3.1 Detached one- and two-family dwellings.
Detached one- and two-family dwellings, lodging houses, live/work units, townhouses not more than three stories above grade plane in height with a separate means of egress, and their accessory structures may be designed and constructed in accordance with this code or the California Building Code, but not both, unless the proposed structure(s) or elements) exceed the design limitations established in this code, and the code user is specifically directed by this code to use the California Building Code.

The Building Code has a similar addition. Prior to the creation of the ICC, California codes were based off the Uniform Building Code. There was no residential code. Many applicants here still don't even understand what the residential code is or why it's there. They design their single-family homes to the building code. I suspect that Oregon is the same.

We are doing the dwellings with IRC. I wanted to use IRC for garages as well, but local building official insists they have to be IBC because IRC definition of "accessory" states they have to be on the same lot as the primary building. In this case garages are on an adjacent lot owned by the HOA. Also, because the garage are clustered in groups of 4. I see where they are coming from, but still think it is a little silly and allowing them to be permitted under IRC would be totally reasonable.

 

[MtnArch]

Do the single family homes own the garage bay they are assigned to (like a condo), or are they totally owned by the HOA and are just assigned a bay for that home?

 

[Joe.B]

We are doing the dwellings with IRC. I wanted to use IRC for garages as well, but local building official insists they have to be IBC because IRC definition of "accessory" states they have to be on the same lot as the primary building. In this case garages are on an adjacent lot owned by the HOA. Also, because the garage are clustered in groups of 4. I see where they are coming from, but still think it is a little silly and allowing them to be permitted under IRC would be totally reasonable.

It is reasonable from your perspective. The BO has to look at it objectively. I know it sounds crazy, but at any time the HOA could vote to sell the building and then it's no longer associated with your residences.