# 1027.3 Exit Discharge for Balconies



## Ryan Schultz (May 10, 2017)

Per 1027.3 (2009), in the following condition illustrated below, which one of the 10ft easements would apply below?  The one in 'orange' or 'brown'?

Thanks Much, Ryan


----------



## cda (May 10, 2017)

Boy balconies are coming up a lot lately


----------



## khsmith55 (May 10, 2017)

....Exterior *balconies, stairs* and ramps....., both your brown and orange apply. Check the "dead end" length of the balcony and the fire resistance requirements of the exterior wall.


----------



## Francis Vineyard (May 10, 2017)

Both . . .


----------



## Ryan Schultz (May 10, 2017)

Since this fall sunder section 1027 (Exit Discharge), would it only apply to those balconies/stairs/ramps that are part of the 1)Exit Access, 2)Exit, or 3)Exit Discharge pathways?

In the scenario illustrated above, the majority of that balcony is not an egress component--since each individual room exits to the main corridor internally.


----------



## khsmith55 (May 10, 2017)

Ryan; You might be able to make that argument if there were "barriers" with gates to prevent occupants from continuing beyond the stair.


----------



## Francis Vineyard (May 10, 2017)

Then would section 1019 provision for dead-ends come into play?


----------



## khsmith55 (May 11, 2017)

Francis; If you provide "barriers" to prevent travel to the rest of the deck I would say NO 1019 does not apply. Not knowing the entire program of the building I will offer some *"guesses"* and possible "solutions". First, it appears the exterior stair is not required for exiting from the interior of the building. Given that, I would provide a recessed door from the corridor to the hallway leading to the deck and would swing the door "in", this way it is clear that this is not a part of the building exiting system. Second, I would treat the deck as a separate "space" with one exit (the exterior stair) if the occupant load is less than 49 (Table 1015.1) and the common path of travel is less than 100' (Section 1014.3, Ex. 1, assuming a sprinklered building). Note, the CPT is all the way down the stair (measured on the "rake"). I also *neglected* a "possible" 2nd exit back into the building because there would not be enough "separation" of exits. If you are in "snow country", I would swing all the doors *in* unless the occupant load of the door is more than 50.
Ken


----------



## khsmith55 (May 11, 2017)

Another thought going back to the original post. Not only would 1027.3 apply but Table 602 would also come into play for the "fire resistance" of the deck and stair. Hopefully it is a V-B building, if so, I would site the building so that the deck and stair are 10'-6" (fudge factor) off the property line.
Ken


----------



## Francis Vineyard (May 11, 2017)

Ken, I was agreeing with your premise in post #6 too. My question was directed at Ryan about the exit path across the deck and with rest of the deck not being an egress component in reference to dead ends.


----------

