Understanding CBC section 1021

[miguele3]

A building official has told me that even though a space may be required to have one means of egress once you exit the space you must have access to two different exits which I agree with. He also says we cannot pass one exit to get to the other exit.This is a type 1A construction high rise, B occupancy.The problem is that this building is existing from 20 to 30 years old and the 2 hour stairs are not at the end of the suite, therefore using this logic you would need to have your single point of egress more to the center of the rectangle. The space in white needs two means of egress however. Still both would be egressing to the left of the stair.I have attached a footprint of the space.

View attachment 1677

View attachment 1677

/monthly_2012_04/572953e5b54b2_BuildingExiting.jpg.5b6a45d8a95fc44141067453431acfa3.jpg

 

[miguele3]

The building official is letting us compartmentalize the space, however he wants a two hour separation. See sketch. We want to reduce the compartment to 1 hour however. See attached sketch

 

[miguele3]

Sorry, can't get it small enough.

 

[RLGA]

He is wrong. You can have a single path up to 75 feet (There are exceptions that allow longer distances). This is called the common path of egress travel. If you can reach the first exit within the common path of egress travel distance (as applicable), then it should be fine, assuming the occupant load of the entire tenant area shown does not exceed that per Table 1015.1.

 

[cda]

Guess the space can never be used!!!!!

Looks like some door swing problem at the elevator lobby

Everyone on that floor needs code complying exit to two exits

 

[RLGA]

A building official has told me that even though a space may be required to have one means of egress once you exit the space you must have access to two different exits which I agree with. He also says we cannot pass one exit to get to the other exit.

Don't you just love it when people who don't understand the basic requirements of the code are placed in a position to enforce it?

 

[Codegeek]

Don't you just love it when people who don't understand the basic requirements of the code are placed in a position to enforce it?

Gotta love it! I had a plans examiner tell me that an A-2 use group which qualified as an accessory use by all the requirements in 508.2 could not be in an unlimited area building (mixed use of M and S-1 groups) unless it met the requirements of 507.3.1, which requires separation and discharge directly to the exterior of the building. The area in question was approximately 1500 square feet in a building that was well over 150,000 square feet.

By the way, miguele3, I agree with Ron. The BO is wrong. Unless the common path of travel requirements cannot be met or the occupant load is greater than 500 which would require three exits from the floor, then I do not see any problems with the egress plan you have provided.

 

[mtlogcabin]

Agree the BO is wrong

Unless CA ammended the common path of travel requirements you should be allowed 100 ft.

B occupancy high rise should be sprinklered then you can have 100 feet of CPOT distance IBC 1014.1 exception 1

 

[cda]

Everyone on the floor needs access to two exits

Appears door swing problem at the elevators