# Common Path of Travel versus Travel Distance



## BayPointArchitect (Oct 8, 2010)

I thought I had a handle on this and perhaps I am so sleeped deprived I can not figure this out.I think I am in trouble with a 2,400 S.F. storage building, two exits arranged so that the "Common Path of Travel" exceeds 75 feet.  But then agian the allowable Travel Distance for unsprinkled storage building is 200 feet.  Although I have two exits, I believe only one exit is required in this scenario. So do I throw out the 75 foot limitation?Does the common path of travel apply regardless of occupant load and required number of exits?Thanks!

View attachment 1399


commonpath.pdf

commonpath.pdf


----------



## cda (Oct 8, 2010)

Looks good

A good buy is the ibc handbook, has lots of different scenarios showing some of this stuff


----------



## peach (Oct 9, 2010)

Common path is the distance one travels to make a decision how to get out.  The floor plan attached isn't probably where I'd measure from (I'd measure from the little office to the double doors).  The common path is part of the travel distance, and is increased in 2006 IBC to 100' in sprinkled S occupancies.  It doesn't really apply in a single exit building.


----------



## vegas paul (Oct 9, 2010)

Your common path appears to be less than 75'.  CPET is NOT the distance to the nearest exit, it is the distance to the point where you have a choice of more than one exit...  In your example, that point is about where you wrote the #75.  As soon as you get around that penninsular wall, you have the choice of going to either of two exits.


----------



## peach (Oct 9, 2010)

Remember that it doesn't apply to one exit buildings... it's just straight travel distance..


----------



## FM William Burns (Oct 9, 2010)

Agree with VP on definition and Peach with regards to measurement (1' off the exterior wall of through double doors to 1' off divider wall is your CPET); however if it were me in the design meeting or review phase, I would be more concerned with remoteness but then again I'm a 101 person.


----------



## TJacobs (Oct 10, 2010)

What FM said...


----------



## cda (Oct 10, 2010)

http://docs.docstoc.com/pdf/297511/2e9cb260-5275-463c-a9e1-365beb1bd838.pdf

http://www.specsandcodes.com/Articles/The%20Code%20Corner%20No.%2029%20-%20Travel%20Distance.pdf


----------



## vegas paul (Oct 11, 2010)

Be careful when looking at Peach's last comment!  She's right, it doesn't apply to 1-exit buildings, but CPET is one of the things that determines if you need a 2nd exit!.  So just because you only design one exit doesn't mean you are compliant.  You could be below the occupant load requiring 2 exits, but still need a 2nd one due to CPET. (But in your example, you are OK).


----------



## syarn (Oct 11, 2010)

with peach...if u measure from the little "office" in the shaded area to the double doors it eyeballs about 85'...longer than 75 feet; no sprinkler - need another exit....and the CPET kicks in too;  the other double doors looks too close to be the other exit; closer than 1/2 the overall diagonal....throw in a sprinkler system and than it looks good to me...


----------



## Builder Bob (Oct 11, 2010)

I am not so sure that 100 feet wouldn't be allowed due to the low occupant load for the S occupancy. The unadmended 2006 IBC section 1014.3 exception # 2 would allow this arrangment.


----------



## BayPointArchitect (Oct 11, 2010)

peach said:
			
		

> Remember that it doesn't apply to one exit buildings... it's just straight travel distance..


Hmmm, I have been thinking that the minimum/maximum distances are established without regard for occupant load - at least for ground level occupancies.  Because the two doors are located less than 1/2 the diagonal, I am now interpreting IBC 1019.2 to dictate that the nearest exterior exit would need to be located within 75' of the most remote point of occupied space (Note: the little room in the middle is a restroom - so just outside that door in this case).  Therefore, my plan would require that the overall occupant load is less than 29 occupants - OR - the door relocated so that it is within 75 feet of the most remote point.


----------



## mtlogcabin (Oct 11, 2010)

Based on the 2006 IBC

Your drawing indicates an M=58 & S-1=6 this would be a total occupant load of 64. If this is a non-seperated use building then an M occupancy would be the most restrictive and according to Table 1019.2 Two exits are required.

I would probably agree with builder bob and allow a 100 ft CPOT for the S-1 occupancy. I also believe syarn is correct the double doors do not meet the 1/2 the diagonal distance for an unsprinklered building



> I believe only one exit is required in this scenario. Incorrect 2 exits are requiredDoes the common path of travel apply regardless of occupant load and required number of exits? Yes unless you can comply with Section 1019.


----------



## vegas paul (Oct 11, 2010)

BayPoint - That's what I was trying to explain earlier...  The door does NOT need to be within 75 '.  You are going to need two exits based on occupant load, however, what's important is that the CPET can not exceed 75'.  That means, within 75' of the most remote location, there has to be a point from which there are two distinct paths to exits.  That point occurs where the big divider ends.  Forget the distance to the door! (At least with regard to the 75').  Review the definition of CPET, then calculate that distance on your drawing, using 90 degree travel paths (not diagonal).

As for the two exits, you will have to move one or add another to meet the separation requirements.


----------



## syarn (Oct 12, 2010)

yes I defer to BB for 100' per exception 2.  thx for that lesson.

also concur with MLC & VP for occupancy load and distance to the first exit door & CPET.


----------

