I remember a discussion of this new requirement when it was adopted but it isn't coming up in my search.
R301.1 ".... Emergency escape and rescue openings shall open directly into a public way, or to a yard or court that opens to a public way."
I still see new townhouses being built that are laid out on narrow lots with the front door opening to the main street and a separate garage with access from an alley that runs behind the townhouses. Both the townhouse and the detached garage are built right up to the property lines on both sides. With this layout, the emergency egress path from the rear bedroom windows is into the back yard, through the garage, and to the alley. Or, into the yard, back into the house and to the street in front of the townhouse. There is no direct access to the street or to the alley or to any public way.
Firefighter access to the rear of the townhouse would be through (or over) the garage or through the neighbor’s garage and over a demising fence.
I don't see how this could comply with the emergency egress requirements. Am I missing something? Have there been discussions to amend this at the ICC hearings?
R301.1 ".... Emergency escape and rescue openings shall open directly into a public way, or to a yard or court that opens to a public way."
I still see new townhouses being built that are laid out on narrow lots with the front door opening to the main street and a separate garage with access from an alley that runs behind the townhouses. Both the townhouse and the detached garage are built right up to the property lines on both sides. With this layout, the emergency egress path from the rear bedroom windows is into the back yard, through the garage, and to the alley. Or, into the yard, back into the house and to the street in front of the townhouse. There is no direct access to the street or to the alley or to any public way.
Firefighter access to the rear of the townhouse would be through (or over) the garage or through the neighbor’s garage and over a demising fence.
I don't see how this could comply with the emergency egress requirements. Am I missing something? Have there been discussions to amend this at the ICC hearings?