Spaces with One Exit

[Phil B]

Just verifying that I am correct in that a space enclosed by low walls is subject to the requirements of table 1006.2.1 with respect to the number of exits required.
Assuming everything else is compliant, the seating area in the sketch below requires 2 exits, correct? (Assembly occupancy, sprinklered building, mixture of fixed and moveable seating).

 

[walker.t]

Just verifying that I am correct in that a space enclosed by low walls is subject to the requirements of table 1006.2.1 with respect to the number of exits required.

Yes, the low walls around the “Seating for 60” area is considered a “space” and has to meet the requirements of 1006.2 which includes Table 1006.2.1.

Assuming everything else is compliant, the seating area in the sketch below requires 2 exits, correct?

Correct, two “exits” (technically “access to exits”) are required because you exceed the maximum occupant load of 49 occupants.

mixture of fixed and moveable seating

Even if your travel distance is within the allowable limits of Table 1006.2.1, you still need two passages providing access to exits because of your occupant load. So travel distance isn’t an issue with your plan, but I would like to suggest that because you have an option for fixed seating that you measure your travel distance parallel and perpendicular to the walls to give you the worst case travel distance when the area is set up for fixed seats in rows.

 

[steveray]

Correct

 

[walker.t]

2 exits

Remember that the openings have to be remotely located per 1007.1.1. Exception 2 allows for separation to be one-third the diagonal distance of the area served by the access openings if the entire building is sprinklered.

 

[Phil B]

Yep. I do have 2 openings directly opposite each other. Client doesn't understand the need for 2. Thanks again!

 

[walker.t]

Thanks again!

You’re welcome!

Client doesn't understand the need for 2.

May seem like overkill in what appears to be a small space, but if 60 people get panicked and a few tables and chairs get knocked over and egress gets jammed up on one side there’s a second way out for other people.

2018 IBC Illustrated Handbook commentary on Section 1007 Exit and Exit Access Doorway Configuration (partial quote)
To ensure that the required egress is sufficiently remote, the code imposes rather strict requirements relative to the location or arrangement of the different required exits or exit access doorways with respect to each other. The purpose here is to do all that is reasonably possible to ensure that if one means of egress should become obstructed, the others will remain available and will be useable by the building occupants.

 

[bill1952]

Too bad they can't get keep OL below 50 but note common path with fixed seats is only 30' per 1030.8.

 

[Phil B]

Too bad they can't get keep OL below 50 but note common path with fixed seats is only 30' per 1030.8.

Yes, I saw that (it's 1029.8 in FBC). In this case there's a mix of fixed and tables & chairs, so 1029.8 wouldn't apply even though the common path of 75' is the same as in table 1006.2.1.

 

[Yankee Chronicler]

Common path of travel always applies.

In the example diagram, the arrow showing a 40-foot path of egress out of the low-wall space is drawn mostly on a diagonal, which is incorrect. It should be measured along rectilinear axes, to allow for occupant having to walk around obstacles such as tables and chairs.

 

[bill1952]

Common path of travel always applies.

In the example diagram, the arrow showing a 40-foot path of egress out of the low-wall space is drawn mostly on a diagonal, which is incorrect. It should be measured along rectilinear axes, to allow for occupant having to walk around obstacles such as tables and chairs.

I would think the drawing should show the fixed seating to make that determination.

 

[Phil B]

If in the same (similar) scenario, could the openings in the low walls be 36" wide, or does the 44" minimum exit width need to continued through the openings because they are not doors? Is there a code section that addresses this?

 

[walker.t]

the 44" minimum exit width

Are you sure you need 44” for the width of the aisle through the seating area? 1018.2 Aisles in Assembly Spaces directs us to 1030 Assembly, 1030.1 General confirms this section applies (“A room or space used for assembly purposes that contains seats, tables…”). That leads us to 1030.9 Assembly Aisles Are Required > 1030.9.1 Minimum Aisle Width Point 4 which says 42” is used for level aisles having seating on both sides. 60 occupants x 0.2”/occupant = 12” is less than that so we use the 42” minimum width.

or does the 44" minimum exit width need to continued through the openings because they are not doors?

I’m reluctant to consider each opening a “doorway” (because there are no doors) and say the width can be 32” for a depth up to 24” per A117.-2017 404.2.2 Clear Width. Because the openings do not have doors, I would consider the aisle to continue through the opening and connect to the aisle leading to the doors, so the width of the opening in the low wall should be at least the same as the aisle.

Is there a code section that addresses this?

The closest I can think of is A117.1-2017 403.5.1 which allows for a reduction in the width of an interior accessible route to be reduced to 32”. But I can’t think of anything in the IBC that specifically says we can reduce the minimum component width of an aisle (or other component, such as a corridor) like that. But it seems odd that if it was a door we could reduce the width to 32”, but as soon as the door is removed that we have to provide the minimum aisle width.

 

[Phil B]

........... But it seems odd that if it was a door we could reduce the width to 32”, but as soon as the door is removed that we have to provide the minimum aisle width.

Thanks for the in-depth response. My pathway is more of an aisle than a corridor, but the minimum 44" for corridors always sticks in my mind. In this case, I can easily achieve 44" so I'll stay with that. It's your last sentence that I was struggling with and agree with you. Thank you.

 

[walker.t]

Thanks for the in-depth response.

You’re welcome!

My pathway is more of an aisle than a corridor, but the minimum 44" for corridors always sticks in my mind.

Probably never a bad idea to provide more width when you have the room to do so. 1018.3 Aisles in Groups B and M says that the width of aisles can’t be less than the width of corridors, so thinking of 44” isn’t unreasonable.

 

[bill1952]

I'm not where I can look at code but isn't there an exception that would allow 36" or 30" aisle? each serving 30 occupants. Not sure it couldn't be all aisle access ways to to openings.