# Egress through Courtyard



## Rick18071 (Sep 7, 2016)

2009 IBC, use group A-3, construction type 3-B. This new addition to a church has 425 occupants exiting into one side of a courtyard. The courtyard has an existing building on two other sides with an unknown amount ( could be in the 100's) of occupants exiting into it. On the open side of the square courtyard it is fenced off with a open bell tower in the center of this open side. The only way out of the courtyard to the public way is through a 8' wide gate under the bell tower. The courtyard is 64' x 80' which includes the open bell tower.

Should I be concerned about the gate opening size? Do I need to get the total amount of occupants that are coming out of all the exit doors into the court yard and use  section 1005 for the egress width for the gate? I cannot find this in section 1027.5 (egress courts). The only thing in the code concerning this is section 1027.6:
_1027.6 Access to a public way.
The exit discharge shall provide a direct and unobstructed access to a public way .
Exception: Where access to a public way cannot be provided, a safe dispersal area shall be provided where all of the following are met:
1. The area shall be of a size to accommodate at least 5 square feet (0.46 m2) for each person.
2. The area shall be located on the same lot at least 50 feet (15 240 mm) away from the building requiring egress.
3. The area shall be permanently maintained and identified as a safe dispersal area.
4. The area shall be provided with a safe and unobstructed path of travel from the building_.

Also shall I be concerned about the second part (after the exception)of section 1027.5.1?
_1027.5.1 Width. 
The width of egress courts shall be determined as specified in Section 1005.1, but such width shall not be less than 44 inches (1118 mm), except as specified herein. Egress courts serving Group R-3 and U occupancies shall not be less than 36 inches (914 mm) in width. The required width of egress courts shall be unobstructed to a height of 7 feet (2134 mm).
Exception: Doors complying with Section 1005.2.
Where an egress court exceeds the minimum required width and the width of such egress court is then reduced along the path of exit travel, the reduction in width shall be gradual. The transition in width shall be affected by a guard not less than 36 inches (914mm) in height and shall not create an angle of more than 30 degrees (0.52 rad) with respect to the axis of the egress court along the path of egress travel. In no case shall the width of the egress court be less than the required minimum.
_
The court yard does not reduce in width but the gate definitely reduces the egress width.


----------



## Rick18071 (Sep 7, 2016)

Also I just found out that there will be a 10' wide overhang all around the courtyard including the open end of the courtyard at the fence connecting the bell tower to the new addition and the existing building.


----------



## cda (Sep 7, 2016)

All buildings have fire sprinklers??

Overhang might need it also

Without a plan, would say as long as the main exit handles 50%

And all others handle 50 %

Should be ok


----------



## cda (Sep 7, 2016)

Oh one important item

Gate not locked

Or require panic hardware set up


----------



## Rick18071 (Sep 7, 2016)

The plan specifies sprinklers but I did not get a sprinkler plan yet.

This is the main entrance for the new 12,600 sq ft addition. I have no plans for the existing part of the building which looks a lot bigger.

The bell tower doesn't look like a tower to me. More like an archway for the gate. It's like a 10' x 10' pavilion with open sides. It connects to the new addition and existing building with a 10' wide, 20' long roof. I guess this would be considered part of the building and a exit enclosure. I don't think it would be considered a vestibule so exception 2,3 or 4 would not work.
_1027.1 General. 
Exits shall discharge directly to the exterior of the building. The exit discharge shall be at grade or shall provide direct access to grade. The exit discharge shall not reenter a building. The combined use of Exceptions 1 and 2 below shall not exceed 50 percent of the number and capacity of the required exits .
Exceptions:
1. A maximum of 50 percent of the number and capacity of the exit enclosures is permitted to egress through areas on the level of discharge provided all of the following are met:
1.1. Such exit enclosures egress to a free and unobstructed path of travel to an exterior exit door and such exit is readily visible and identifiable from the point of termination of the exit enclosure.
1.2. The entire area of the level of exit discharge is separated from areas below by construction conforming to the fire-resistance rating for the exit enclosure .
1.3. The egress path from the exit enclosure on the level of exit discharge is protected throughout by an approved automatic sprinkler system . All portions of the level of exit discharge with access to the egress path shall either be protected throughout with an automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2, or separated from the egress path in accordance with the requirements for the enclosure of exits .
2. A maximum of 50 percent of the number and capacity of the exit enclosures is permitted to egress through a vestibule provided all of the following are met:
2.1. The entire area of the vestibule is separated from areas below by construction conforming to the fire-resistance rating for the exit enclosure .
2.2. The depth from the exterior of the building is not greater than 10 feet (3048 mm) and the length is not greater than 30 feet (9144 mm).
2.3. The area is separated from the remainder of the level of exit discharge by construction providing protection at least the equivalent of approved wired glass in steel frames.
2.4. The area is used only for means of egress and exits directly to the outside.
3. Stairways in open parking garages complying with Section 1022.1, Exception 4, are permitted to egress through the open parking garage at their levels of exit discharge .
4. Horizontal exits complying with Section 1025 shall not be required to discharge directly to the exterior of the building.

According to exception 1.3 they would need to sprinkle the whole outdoor courtyard.
Am I looking at this right?_


----------



## cda (Sep 7, 2016)

No would say 1.3 does not apply

BUT, NFPA 13 might require it

Without a plan hard to say

Sounds like you need to require an exit analysis for the new and existing.


----------



## Rick18071 (Sep 7, 2016)

Does this pertain to the gate?

1027.2 Exit discharge capacity.
The capacity of the exit discharge shall be not less than the required discharge capacity of the exits being served.

But there is nothing in the code for gates.


----------



## Rick18071 (Sep 7, 2016)




----------



## IJHumberson (Sep 7, 2016)

Seems to me like Sect. 1027.5 would apply, but the layout doesn't appear to meet 1027.5.1, which requires the reduction in available width to be gradual.

Another issue I see is that they have the Vestibule (or at least some of it) discharging through the courtyard as the side doors opening into the courtyard- that looks like it would not comply with Sect. 1028.2, which requires the main exit to serve 50% of the occupant load. I would say that you can't take part of that 50% and then put them back in the same required path as the secondary exits.

One other thing - the gates at the Bell Tower swing in the wrong direction. (per Sect. 1008.2, gates must comply with the same requirements as doors).

Without knowing any more about the existing building, it's hard to assess whether that complies. If it is a distinctly separate building from this one, then the occupant loads would not have to be combined. By them constructing this courtyard in the path of egress for that building will require an assessment of the exit arrangements from that building, too - it might be that some of those six pairs of doors are supposed to be separate exits, and, once they merge into that courtyard, they no longer have two exits.


----------



## my250r11 (Sep 7, 2016)

Don't like the opening direction of the gate @ bell tower needs to open out from the court. Definitely need an accurate OL count, IMO the single gate is not wide enough to accommodate that many exits.


----------



## Rick18071 (Sep 7, 2016)

Thanks IJHumberson. I did not know about the section on gates. That helps a lot. But we have a disagreement here if the bell tower is a building or just a structure. If is a building then IBC 1027.1 would apply which does not let you reenter a building with exceptions.
The only exception that would apply would be exception 1  which requires sprinklers in the bell tower and the whole courtyard.
So is the bell tower a building?


----------



## ADAguy (Sep 7, 2016)

when is a structure not a building? When it is not occupiable, this appears to be an architectural "theme" structure only and not intended for human habitation.


----------



## Rick18071 (Sep 7, 2016)

To me it's like a pavilion. Wouldn't you define a pavilion as a building?
IBC definition:
_BUILDING. Any structure used or intended for supporting or sheltering any use or occupancy_.
There is a drive just outside of the gate. It looks like to me that is indented to shelter people from the rain or snow while they are waiting to be picked up or dropped  off.


----------



## ADAguy (Sep 7, 2016)

Yes, see below.

Food for thought:

*Building: definition*



1. *a relatively permanent enclosed construction (*_structure_*)* over a plot of land, having a roof and usually windows and often more than one level, *used for any of a wide variety of activities (*_intended purpose_*), as living, entertaining, or manufacturing. *

2. *anything* built or constructed.



Vs.



*Structure: definition *

*Something (*_anything_*) built or constructed; *for occupancy, use or ornamentation

*Construction or framework of identifiable elements* (components, entities, factors, members, parts, steps, etc.) which gives form and stability, and resists stresses and strains.

*Structures have defined boundaries* within which

(1) each element is physically or functionally connected to the other elements, and

(2) the elements themselves and their interrelationships are taken to be either fixed (permanent) or changing only occasionally or slowly.


_Building and structure may be used interchangeably. _


*Consider:* If built it must be constructed and if constructed it must have structure.

                Then the structure of which it is built must be comprised of or be a system

                of self supporting elements.


----------



## Rick18071 (Sep 7, 2016)




----------



## JBI (Sep 7, 2016)

I would consider anything outside of the enclosing walls of the building to be 'exit discharge', not 'exit'. 
I would also consider the bell tower to be a structure, but not a building as defined and intended in the Code.
I would need a lot more information about the _design_ of the egress systems for all involved buildings before making a call about the gate... but leaning toward possibly making it wider.
Out swinging gates without question.


----------



## Rick18071 (Sep 8, 2016)

_IBC definition:

BUILDING. Any structure used or intended for supporting or sheltering any use or occupancy_.

It is obvious to me that the bell tower and the connecting overhangs are for sheltering people from the elements. So if it not a "building" I would not be able to use Chapter 5 "General Building Heights and Areas" for the bell tower and they could build it as high as they wished with any type of construction? 

IBC definition:
AREA, BUILDING. The area included within surrounding exterior walls (or exterior walls and fire walls ) exclusive of vent shafts and courts. Areas of the building not provided with surrounding walls shall be included in the building area if such areas are included within the horizontal projection of the roof or floor above.

So you don't think the bell tower is a building but it is part of the Building Area?

I


----------



## Rick18071 (Sep 8, 2016)

Sorry, that last sentence should say:

So you don't think the bell tower is not a “building” but it is part of the “Building Area”?


----------



## ADAguy (Sep 8, 2016)

It the act of "sheltering" implies that the structure "covers" an area for its intended purpose, thereby inferring that it "encloses" the covered area, can then an enclosure be either/or horizontal vs vertical?

Many horizontal enclosure structures only touch the ground at minimal points, think domes, arches, etc. without intervening walls. The tower you show supports an upper unoccupied area while the lower area can in fact "shelter" many people during a lightning storm or rainstorm, thereby obstructing the gates.

The design is similar to many Spanish courtyards with eves over open air corridors surrounding gardens. All rooms or in this case the parish hall exit into the corridors and funnel to an entrance/tower/vestibule structure. If only one opening from the tower it must be large enough to exit the total number of people with in the enclosed area or 1/2 if 2 exits are provided.


----------



## Rick18071 (Sep 8, 2016)

_This goes to an argument of what is a building or a structure. I don't think it needs to be completely enclosed to shelter someone. Wouldn't you think that a pavilion for a picnic tables be sheltering? Or a bus stop shelter that has a open side.
But a bomb shelter would be expected to be enclosed. A steeple on a church a structure. But is it also part of the building even if it not occupied? If is not a building how do you enforce section 5 about how high a building is? It does not say anything about enforcing the height of structures.

Is there a forum on this site about building vs. structures?
This is really interesting. I hope others will join in with their opinions._


----------



## Rick18071 (Sep 8, 2016)

Just talked to ICC. They told me that the bell tower would be considered as part of the main building. So the bell tower is a building. But when I asked about 1027.1 reentering a building to get to a public way on a exit discharge they said that they didn't think that would apply, but they could not tell me where in the code that it says it does not apply.


----------



## ADAguy (Sep 8, 2016)

Agreed that a bus shelter, picnic shelter, shade structure are usually open sided and exposed to safe areas. The structure shown however may be seen as an obstruction (funnel/collector) of exiting persons from enclosed covered areas that may contribute too the number of people seeking to use the exit gates at the same time. Are fences structures? it depends on how they are constructed. People exiting the Rose bowl collect in open yards in front of the gates but the gates must still be wide enough and of enough quantity to allow for safe exit of the total number of people contained within (seated, working personnel and participants (are they also counted?)) 

So, how many people feed into this area and exit beneath the structure? Are the gates then wide enough? Is separation provided to another exit?


----------



## Rick18071 (Sep 8, 2016)

I will have to find out.
Can't the bell tower be a shelter (building) and an obstruction too?

 Two sides of the courtyard is an existing building which I have to get info on. They only gave me info (building size, occupant load, etc.) on the new structure which they are calling an addition. So I don't know how many people exit through it yet. I need to tell them that I need to look at it as a separate building and they need fire walls to separate the buildings. That should be fun with all those overhangs connecting the buildings.

Also learned a new word today. Porte-Cochere. Had to look it up. It's a large entrance way, which is what the bell tower is. And it might need to be sprinklered anyway.

*NFPA 13 8.15.7 Exterior Roofs, Canopies, or Porte-Cochere.* Unless the requirements of 8.15.7.2, 815.7.3, or 815.7.4 are met, sprinklers shall be installed under exterior roofs, canopies, or porte-cocheres exceeding 4 ft. in width.


----------



## ADAguy (Sep 8, 2016)

Careful Rick, Porte-Cochere is intended as a pass through for carriages and vehicles per my "old" architecture dictionaries. There are many examples of these in old pre-motor vehicle Pasadena. Think of it as drive through garage, usually 0 lot line, not intended for habitation.


----------



## ADAguy (Sep 8, 2016)

The overhangs may be seen as "Verandas" another word you may not be familiar with;
a roofed platform along the outside of a house, level with the ground floor.
synonyms: porch, gallery, balcony, lanai, sun porch, stoop
"we'll have our coffee on the veranda"
Typically found in Spanish, Moorish, Mexican, New Orleans and other styles of architecture.


----------



## steveray (Sep 9, 2016)

I don't like any part of that design......Is the bell tower sprinklered? If it is part of the building it would need to be.....With exceptions if it could actually be considered an overhang or similar which would take me a lot of convincing....Missed that you just caught that....

Too much going on for a quick analysis, but lot lines and distance from them would be critical...


----------



## Rick18071 (Sep 9, 2016)

Did not get sprinkler plan yet. NFPA 13 8.15.7 requires overhangs over 4' to be sprinklered. All the overhangs in the courtyard come out 10' on the proposed and the existing building. The roofs of the overhangs and bell tower are wood t&g. The plans indicate that the overhangs on the existing building are all ready there. Don't know if the existing overhangs are are sprinklered are not. Don't know anything about the existing building except that by the drawings it looks modern and a lot bigger than the 12,600 sq ft proposal. They are calling it addition but I need to tell them that it will need to be a sperate building with fire walls between the buildings.


----------



## ADAguy (Sep 9, 2016)

Many yet to be answered questions, eh?


----------



## Rick18071 (Sep 12, 2016)

Yes. Will go out to look at the site today


----------



## JBI (Sep 12, 2016)

_"So you don't think the bell tower is not a “building” but it is part of the “Building Area”?"_

Personally, yes. See also definition for 'canopy' in the IBC. 
As far as the church steeple (see Rick18071 comment above), see exception to 504.3 in 2015 IBC.


----------



## ADAguy (Sep 14, 2016)

The steeple (where bells are?) is not intended for occupancy, should be viewed as a mechanical penthouse.
However I believe the area beneath the steeple through which people may congregate to exit serves as a collection point for exiting and should be viewed as part the "Building Area".


----------

