If the waiting area exceeds 50, it technically can be requested to be A3. But if you are under 50, the code states it may be part of the main occupancy. 2021 IBC 303.1.1
2021 IBC Section 1020.4 is clear that dead ends only become an issue when MORE THAN ONE EXIT is required. Since a B Occupancy only needs one exit with 49 occupants, dead ends are not an issue.
@@archicorner Time needed for occupants to evacuate this is an important factor in smoke management study and several elements contribute to this calculation such stair, corridor and door configuration
If we added a door at the start or middle of the corridor, wouldn't that solve the dead-end issue? so, we can make the coffee bar bigger, but will we need to pay for one more door?
I think maybe you could. The problem with this specific floorplan is an added door would lead the occupants into another tenant space. @archicorner can you speak to that?
No, because in his drawing the door swinging open to the hallway would impede the pathway to the exit. Although the exit door leading to the lobby should swing outward.
Per IBC 1010.1.2.1; If an area contains an occupant load of 50 or more or a group H occupancy, then the door must swing in the direction of egress travel.
There are various exceptions allowing a building not to have an area of refuge at stairs. In general, a NEW non-sprinklered building usually has an area of refuge, yes. But this example was with an existing building.
Not normally. However, if an open office is used for a very concentrated load of people, such as a call center or trading floor, then you may have to use 50 per IBC section 1004.8.
How do you address the issue of non-simultaneous occupancy? The users of the coffee bar is mostly the occupants of the office, would it be the coffee bar is part of the “net floor area” of the office? I know we need to address the worst case scenario, but some office has small breakroom or pantry and not designated as a separate function? Is a coffee bar different in function than a breakroom or a pantry?
Technically speaking, the building code does not address "simultaneous occupancies", if it does, please let me know where. The IBC notes that the occupant load has to be based on the assigned function of the space (IBC 1004.5). The question is: Is a break room's assigned function: assembly with tables and chairs? If so, you use such load and if not, then you may need to explain why there are tables and chairs. If there are no tables and no chairs, then it may be easier to reason why you may be using a different occupant load.
@@archicorner Obviously every AHJ has to be worked with in their own manner, but I'd argue that concentrated business use would be a much more accurate descriptor for a coffee bar. If you swapped the coffee bar area with the two desks just above how would you delineate how much floor space needs to be attributed to the assembly area and subtracted from the office gross area?
You can certainly argue that. We can go around this in circles, but in the end, whoever signs the plans is responsible for the outcome (good or bad). If you believe that concentrated business use is correct, then you can certainly ague that method. Thank you for the comments and taking the time to point this out.
@@archicorner Of Course! I definitely wasn't trying to imply that you were making a poor design choice. You mentioned right off that plan reviewer comments are pushing things that direction. Your videos are awesome btw, they have helped me immensely with understanding the nuances of egress. So here is a question for this drawing: If you are using the occupant load to keep yourself from needing a second exit which in turn activates the corridor requirement, what about common path of travel? The travel distance from the left bottom corner to the right is over 100' per your diagonal, so from that direction you would need a second exit unless the lower exit is counted as the required exit. So my question is, what is the travel distance from the lower left corner of the conference room out and around down to the lower exit door? If it was over 75' would you then need to count both exits as required and be stuck with your corridor issue again?
That is something we used to do but the AHJs in our area often reject it now. The reason is that a break room often has tables and chairs, which falls within the description of an assembly areas in chapter 10.
I see, hence the design feature of a dead end. Now, if an existing layout need be maintained and distance extends beyond the limit, then may a "fire door assy exit access" remedy or satisfy the code? I am thinking of renovations or existing buildings more specifically. Thanks again..
Sir, I am resident of India and have some list of queries regarding fire safety regulations. Please share your email id for me to share the queries to you?
![Megan Thee Stallion - Bigger In Texas [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/QxTkZTLWdo4/mqdefault.jpg)
I'm a fire inspector and follow several of you architects. You guys and gals explain more practicality than inspector classes do. Thanks again!!
Wow, thanks!
Who else do you follow?
archicorner is a fantastic resource! Who else have you come across?
You are the one who can make people's headaches go away. Please continue; I appreciate it very much.
Thanks! I will try!
This material IS INCREDIBLY outstanding. We need explanations and problem solving situations where such concepts are applied.
This is education.
Glad you liked it.
Thank you for the video.
In the past, we encountered plan checkers who required us to use A3 for the waiting area at the reception.
If the waiting area exceeds 50, it technically can be requested to be A3. But if you are under 50, the code states it may be part of the main occupancy. 2021 IBC 303.1.1
This is a great video thank you!
I love this method of teaching. Using a real set of plans is such a great idea! I hope to see more of this in the future! Thanks!
More to come!
I really enjoyed this new problem-solving format, great video as allways! ;)
Glad you enjoyed it!
Loved the video being a plans examiner its great to see a detail explanation on a common problem ! Keep the videos coming!
Thanks, will do!
Excellent video, thank you!
Glad you enjoyed it!
There is a dead end issue with 49 occupants also. Since space is not sprinklered, you are limited to 20’ regardless of 49 or 50 occupants.
2021 IBC Section 1020.4 is clear that dead ends only become an issue when MORE THAN ONE EXIT is required. Since a B Occupancy only needs one exit with 49 occupants, dead ends are not an issue.
Should be in Section 1020.5. But, does that mean if only one exit needed , the dead end can be infinite long?
Thank you for this explanation.
Is there an explanation for the evacuation time calculation using a simplified method?
Can you explain what you mean by "time calculation"?
@@archicorner
Time needed for occupants to evacuate
this is an important factor in smoke management study and several elements contribute to this calculation such stair, corridor and door configuration
If we added a door at the start or middle of the corridor, wouldn't that solve the dead-end issue?
so, we can make the coffee bar bigger, but will we need to pay for one more door?
I think maybe you could. The problem with this specific floorplan is an added door would lead the occupants into another tenant space. @archicorner can you speak to that?
Do you have any tools for hospital specific spaces?
Sir, we would be grateful if you could provide us with a video of parking calculation for each occupancy type.
Already uploaded, check out episode 046. 👍🏽 😊
Is it possible to do a code comparison of 11A and 11B from California Building Code ?
Interesting concept. Not sure how to go about comparing those two chapters, they are very different in application.
All doors would need to swing toward the direction of egress travel too. Correct?
No, because in his drawing the door swinging open to the hallway would impede the pathway to the exit. Although the exit door leading to the lobby should swing outward.
Yes, I should of been more specific. Thank you
Per IBC 1010.1.2.1; If an area contains an occupant load of 50 or more or a group H occupancy, then the door must swing in the direction of egress travel.
If this building is not sprinklered it should have area(s) of refuge. Right?
There are various exceptions allowing a building not to have an area of refuge at stairs. In general, a NEW non-sprinklered building usually has an area of refuge, yes. But this example was with an existing building.
@@archicorner Thanks !
My question is does your open offices have to be divided by 50 instead of 150?
Not normally. However, if an open office is used for a very concentrated load of people, such as a call center or trading floor, then you may have to use 50 per IBC section 1004.8.
How do you address the issue of non-simultaneous occupancy? The users of the coffee bar is mostly the occupants of the office, would it be the coffee bar is part of the “net floor area” of the office? I know we need to address the worst case scenario, but some office has small breakroom or pantry and not designated as a separate function? Is a coffee bar different in function than a breakroom or a pantry?
Technically speaking, the building code does not address "simultaneous occupancies", if it does, please let me know where. The IBC notes that the occupant load has to be based on the assigned function of the space (IBC 1004.5). The question is: Is a break room's assigned function: assembly with tables and chairs? If so, you use such load and if not, then you may need to explain why there are tables and chairs. If there are no tables and no chairs, then it may be easier to reason why you may be using a different occupant load.
Thank you for explaining. Great lecture as usual.
@@archicorner Obviously every AHJ has to be worked with in their own manner, but I'd argue that concentrated business use would be a much more accurate descriptor for a coffee bar. If you swapped the coffee bar area with the two desks just above how would you delineate how much floor space needs to be attributed to the assembly area and subtracted from the office gross area?
You can certainly argue that. We can go around this in circles, but in the end, whoever signs the plans is responsible for the outcome (good or bad). If you believe that concentrated business use is correct, then you can certainly ague that method. Thank you for the comments and taking the time to point this out.
@@archicorner Of Course! I definitely wasn't trying to imply that you were making a poor design choice. You mentioned right off that plan reviewer comments are pushing things that direction.
Your videos are awesome btw, they have helped me immensely with understanding the nuances of egress.
So here is a question for this drawing: If you are using the occupant load to keep yourself from needing a second exit which in turn activates the corridor requirement, what about common path of travel? The travel distance from the left bottom corner to the right is over 100' per your diagonal, so from that direction you would need a second exit unless the lower exit is counted as the required exit. So my question is, what is the travel distance from the lower left corner of the conference room out and around down to the lower exit door? If it was over 75' would you then need to count both exits as required and be stuck with your corridor issue again?
Can’t you just make that last office larger cutting off the corridor?
Why not count the break area as accessory?
That is something we used to do but the AHJs in our area often reject it now. The reason is that a break room often has tables and chairs, which falls within the description of an assembly areas in chapter 10.
One more thing, the right entrance door swing must be reversed if occupant load is more than 50.
You are correct. But the occupant load isn't over 50 in this example. Doors are relatively easy to flip if needed.
If the occupancy is 49 there is no need for two exit doors.
Correct.
wHY COUL YOU ADD A EXIT DOOR AT THE DEAD END?
The idea is that a door provides a barrier that deters someone form continuing that path and they turn back.
I see, hence the design feature of a dead end. Now, if an existing layout need be maintained and distance extends beyond the limit, then may a "fire door assy exit access" remedy or satisfy the code? I am thinking of renovations or existing buildings more specifically. Thanks again..
Sir, I am resident of India and have some list of queries regarding fire safety regulations.
Please share your email id for me to share the queries to you?