Exit Discharge Question for 3-Story Apartment Project

[ETThompson]

Hi

A question about a small apartment project I’m working on. This is a 3-story, 12 unit apartment building, Type VB construction, about 12,500 sf. R-2 apartments with an A-2 retail shell on level 01. On the 3rd floor we have a small rooftop deck classified as R-2 due to its size (per 303.1.2). The retail is separated from the residential area by 1-hour construction (we are fully type 13 sprinkelered). We’re under the 2017 Ohio Building Code which is mostly based on the 2015 IBC.

My question is about exiting. We have two enclosed exit stairs serving the apartments on the upper floors and a small roof amenity deck (classified as R-2 due to its size per 303.1.2). These stairs are served by open air breezeway balconies on the upper levels. In other words, you'd come out of your apartment onto this covered but open air breezeway, and then go to the enclosed exit stair to get out from the upper levels.

At the ground level, one of these stairs exits into the building lobby, so that is covered by the intervening spaces rule in 1016.2. The second exits to the exterior, but it is initially (for about 10’) under the breezeway balconies. Is this a problem? I know I have to exit “directly to the exterior” but it I cannot find anything saying this would not be considered the exterior. There is no specific definition of “Exterior” in our code.

Secondly, after you get out from under this balcony, you’re essentially in an approx. 5’ wide alley between the building and the property line. Would this be considered an Egress Court? And thus the rules of 1028.4? So, I would therefore need to rate all adjacent walls to 1-hour? This should not be a problem, as they are required to be rated already, but mostly wondering how to correctly interpret this Exit Discharge condition.

Thanks

 

[RLGA]

Actually, for the exit into the lobby, Section 1016.2 is not applicable since that section only applies to the exit access. I think what you're looking for is Section 1028.1, Exception 1.

As for your main question, I don't believe this will be a problem as long as it complies with Section 1028.3, which states that an exit discharge component must be "sufficiently open to the exterior so as to minimize the accumulation of smoke and toxic gases."

Regarding your second question, the answer is yes. Per the definition in Chapter 2, an egress court is a "court or yard which provides access to a public way for one or more exits." Since what you describe conforms to a yard as defined in Chapter 2, then it would be considered an egress court and must have the required wall and opening protection.

 

[ETThompson]

Great, thanks!

A related question, I would think this is obvious but I'm not sure where to prove it: the doors out of our exit stairs may end up being closer together than the separation distance required at the upper floors. Is there any distance requirement between where exit stairs come out?

 

[cda]

How about "continuity" ??

Are any of these enclosures rated?

 

[ETThompson]

How about "continuity" ??

Are any of these enclosures rated?

The stair enclosures? Yes, they are 1-hour rated.

 

[cda]

The stair enclosures? Yes, they are 1-hour rated.

Normally you have to maintain that rating till you get to public way

Will have to dig up that section of the code


Not sure if it is 1020.6 ???

 

[RLGA]

Great, thanks!

A related question, I would think this is obvious but I'm not sure where to prove it: the doors out of our exit stairs may end up being closer together than the separation distance required at the upper floors. Is there any distance requirement between where exit stairs come out?

I’m not sure I follow...do you mean at the discharge level the doors from each stairwell are closer than the required separation or just closer than it is provided at the upper floors? As long as they meet the required separation distance, it complies.

 

[ETThompson]

I’m not sure I follow...do you mean at the discharge level the doors from each stairwell are closer than the required separation or just closer than it is provided at the upper floors? As long as they meet the required separation distance, it complies.

The doors in to the stairs on the upper floors - where you go into the protected condition - meet the separation distance requirement. But where they discharge, at the ground level exterior, they are closer together, and closer than the separation distance (1/3 of the diagonal). Why would it matter if they were closer together where they discharge? I thought the intent of the code requirement was to provide options in case one exit is blocked. But where you come out shouldn't matter, should it?

 

[steveray]

The "exit" doesn't stop until you get out to a public way...Sort of.....If a car crashes into one of the doors and catches on fire, does anyone get out of the building?

 

[cda]

The doors in to the stairs on the upper floors - where you go into the protected condition - meet the separation distance requirement. But where they discharge, at the ground level exterior, they are closer together, and closer than the separation distance (1/3 of the diagonal). Why would it matter if they were closer together where they discharge? I thought the intent of the code requirement was to provide options in case one exit is blocked. But where you come out shouldn't matter, should it?

So the exiting on the 1st floor is wrong to begin with???

 

[ETThompson]

The "exit" doesn't stop until you get out to a public way...Sort of.....If a car crashes into one of the doors and catches on fire, does anyone get out of the building?

These are not on a street, you're in a exterior alley until you get to the street. So no door could be hit by a car...

 

[ETThompson]

So the exiting on the 1st floor is wrong to begin with???

Can you explain what you mean by "wrong"?

The first level is the level these exit stairs discharge to. If you were on the first floor, and there was a fire, you would have no need to go into these stairs to exit the building. In fact all the dwelling units at level one have doors on the street, so they would not even have to go out into this back alley where the stairs are.

I'm still not understanding if the doors *out* of these stairs have to be separated according to the 1/3 rule, and if so, why? What would be the purpose? Honestly, until someone raised the question above, it never occurred to me that this could be an issue.

Here's the code language (emphasis mine): "...Where two exits, exit access doorways, exit access stairways or ramps, or any combination thereof, are required from any portion of the exit access". I took the "from" in that to mean that it only applies to the areas it serves, in other words the upper levels and doors. It just doesn't make sense to me why they'd have to be separated where they come out.

The way I'd always understood it is the separation is to give you a choice of where to go in a fire. But then you choose one stair or the other, and when you come out you don't have a choice...

I don't think I've even put separation distance on my level 01 life safety plans typically, though I'm not sure I've had the situation before where they are closer together.

 

[cda]

Can you explain what you mean by "wrong"?

The first level is the level these exit stairs discharge to. If you were on the first floor, and there was a fire, you would have no need to go into these stairs to exit the building. In fact all the dwelling units at level one have doors on the street, so they would not even have to go out into this back alley where the stairs are.

I'm still not understanding if the doors *out* of these stairs have to be separated according to the 1/3 rule, and if so, why? What would be the purpose? Honestly, until someone raised the question above, it never occurred to me that this could be an issue.

Here's the code language (emphasis mine): "...Where two exits, exit access doorways, exit access stairways or ramps, or any combination thereof, are required from any portion of the exit access". I took the "from" in that to mean that it only applies to the areas it serves, in other words the upper levels and doors. It just doesn't make sense to me why they'd have to be separated where they come out.

The way I'd always understood it is the separation is to give you a choice of where to go in a fire. But then you choose one stair or the other, and when you come out you don't have a choice...

I don't think I've even put separation distance on my level 01 life safety plans typically, though I'm not sure I've had the situation before where they are closer together.

Can you make the floor plan into a link

Post the link

Might help

 

[cda]

Can you explain what you mean by "wrong"?

The first level is the level these exit stairs discharge to. If you were on the first floor, and there was a fire, you would have no need to go into these stairs to exit the building. In fact all the dwelling units at level one have doors on the street, so they would not even have to go out into this back alley where the stairs are.

I'm still not understanding if the doors *out* of these stairs have to be separated according to the 1/3 rule, and if so, why? What would be the purpose? Honestly, until someone raised the question above, it never occurred to me that this could be an issue.

Here's the code language (emphasis mine): "...Where two exits, exit access doorways, exit access stairways or ramps, or any combination thereof, are required from any portion of the exit access". I took the "from" in that to mean that it only applies to the areas it serves, in other words the upper levels and doors. It just doesn't make sense to me why they'd have to be separated where they come out.

The way I'd always understood it is the separation is to give you a choice of where to go in a fire. But then you choose one stair or the other, and when you come out you don't have a choice...

I don't think I've even put separation distance on my level 01 life safety plans typically, though I'm not sure I've had the situation before where they are closer together.

“”””. But where they discharge, at the ground level exterior, they are closer together, and closer than the separation distance (1/3 of the diagonal). “””

Sounds like if this is an existing building, existing exits

Sounds like they do not meet code now???

 

[ETThompson]

I don't have the plans at home, so drew a quick diagram.

The reason the doors at level 01 are closer together is the floor to floor from level 01 to 02 is higher than the upper floors, so we have to have an additional switchback in the stair (but due to tight site could not increase size of stair enclosure).

Contrary to my original post, the left stair does *not* currently exit into/through the lobby, but into this exterior space/alley that leads to the public way...

 

[cda]

Brand new building?

Sorry lost on code overload this week.

 

[ETThompson]

Yes, new construction.

 

[cda]

I would say there is a problem on the 1st floor

I would say yes they have to be 1/3 apart,
Plus they appear to discharge into the same area???

Plus I still think if a person enters a rated shaft/ stair, that rating has to be maintained till out of the building.

“””but it is initially (for about 10’) under the breezewaybalconies.”””

 

[Builder Bob]

Once a level of protection is achieved in an exit, it cannot be reduced until you have reached the exit discharge (IBC 1022.1) - and me thinks you have a problem in the egress scheme presented....

Exit discharge is not to the public way - see definition of public way
level of protection in exit is not maintained to exit discharge
separation of exits in an issue.
No elevator for accessibility ?
separation of exits 1/3 diagonal

Options - 1 interior exit stairway and another exterior stairway? - allowable for up to six stories

Roof area SF may have an area that requires 2 exits - only one exit provided. No dimensions provided so a guess based on apt sizing in sketch

etc. etc. etc.

 

[steveray]

These are not on a street, you're in a exterior alley until you get to the street. So no door could be hit by a car...

To rephrase....The reason for exit separation is to reduce the likely hood of both being compromised in a single incident (car crash, dumpster fire, structural collapse, etc...) the exit discharge needs to be separated the same as the entrance to an exit....

 

[ETThompson]

Let me tackle the questions Builder Bob (and Steveray) bring up in order...

First the original issue about the proximity of the doors out of the exit stairs at the ground floor: I get the possible conceptual objection (the two exit doors are too close if one is compromised), but what I see in the actual code language is: "Where two exits, exit access doorways, exit access stairways or ramps, or any combination thereof, are required from any portion of the exit access, the distance... (etc)" The exit access is the path leading to, not from, these stairs. The stairs themselves are the exits. And once you get out of them, you're in the exit discharge. Doesn't a reading of the actual language as above refer only to where you go in to the stairs?

And per RLGA's comments above, I can consider where they come out to be the exterior, even though it is for a few feet underneath the walkway above, because it is open enough to still qualify as exterior: (from RLGA above); "I don't believe this will be a problem as long as it complies with Section 1028.3, which states that an exit discharge component must be "sufficiently open to the exterior so as to minimize the accumulation of smoke and toxic gases." If this is considered the exterior (and/or Egress Court, see below), how am I reducing the protection?

These doors do not exit to the public way directly, but are the exit access, and do exit to the exterior via this alley, which can be classified as an Egress Court. I know I have to rate the walls of that (including fences along property line?) to 1-hour, and have 45 min openings at the doors and windows. But otherwise, this seems OK if it is true that, as RLGA says, I can consider it exterior.

I'll address the elevator and accessibility in the next post.

 

[ETThompson]

As far as accessibility and elevators, we are fewer than 20 apartment units, so per the Ohio Building Code, we do not have to provide Type A units (OBC 1107.6.2.2.1). "In Group R-2 occupancies containing more than 20 dwelling units or sleeping units, at least 2 percent but not less than one of the units shall be a Type A unit."

So we have only Type B units. OBC 1104 exception 7 says "Stories or mezzanines that do not contain accessible elements or other spaces as determined by Section 1107 or 1108 are not required to be served by an accessible route from an accessible level", and 1107.4 exc 7 says "An accessible route between stories is not required where Type B units are exempted by Section 1107.7".

Finally, section 1107.7 says; "
1107.7.1 Structures without elevator service. Where no elevator service is provided in a structure, only the dwelling units and sleeping units that are located on stories indicated in Sections 1107.7.1.1 and 1107.7.1.2 are required to be Type A units and Type B units, respectively. The number of Type A units shall be determined in accordance with Section 1107.6.2.2.1.

1107.7.1.1 One story with Type B units required. At least one story containing dwelling units or sleeping units intended to be occupied as a residence shall be provided with an accessible entrance from the exterior of the structure and all units intended to be occupied as a residence on that story shall be Type B units.

1107.7.1.2 Additional stories with Type B units. On all other stories that have a building entrance in proximity to arrival points intended to serve units on that story, as indicated in Items 1 and 2, all dwelling units and sleeping units intended to be occupied as a residence served by that entrance on that story shall be Type B units."

So, based on that I do not think we are required to have elevator service to the upper levels.

 

[ETThompson]

Finally, as far as the roof deck and the single exit, OBC 1006.3.2 Single Exits exc. 2 says "Rooms, areas and spaces complying with Section 1006.2.1 with exits that discharge directly to the exterior at the level of exit discharge, are permitted to have one exit or access to a single exit."

The roof amenity is classified as a B Occupancy per 303.1.1. And in Table 1006.2.1 it says for B Occupancy I can have a single exit for that occupancy if I'm fewer than 49 occupants, which we meet (we have 36 occupants).

 

[cda]

Well as I say

See if it flys

Maybe have a conceptual set down with the building offical

And see if you get thumbs up or down!!!