# means of egress, existing buildings



## BSSTG (Nov 6, 2013)

Greetings all,

In preparation for my meeting in 2 weeks I've been having to do some homework. One of the key topics I've been asked to talk about is issues with existing buildings and when they have to modernize the MOE. I have always told folks that you have to be able to get out of a building when it's on fire. Most folks don't argue with that too much. However, if a building was legally built and occupied (whenever), and has been continuously occupied with no alterations, would all components of means of egress be grandfathered if properly maintained even though they would be considered outdated by todays codes?   In my mind it gets a little dicey. There seems to be some conflict in the various codes about this. However section 702 of the IPMC states that MOE in existing building shall comply with the IFC.

I know one thing is disturbing, I went out this am and took about a dozen pics of what looks to be illegal door hardware on a bunch of rear exit doors. Looks like a bunch of thumb latches, one metal padlocked gate, and I didn't look too long. It didn't take long to spot this stuff either, all in the historic district.

Any comments would be helpful.

BSSTG


----------



## cda (Nov 6, 2013)

Yes and no

Problem is you do not know what was original door hardware that was approved

Also, has the building changed over the years, use, remodel, etc

I think in general the answer is yes, but can be case by case

I think if I saw something that was life safety issue on a door, I would address it


----------



## mtlogcabin (Nov 6, 2013)

Starting in 2009 the IFC has requirements that are retroactive to existing buildings

see 1103 and 1104 in the 2012 IFC

1103.1 Required construction.

Existing buildings shall comply with not less than the minimum provisions specified in Table 1103.1 and as further enumerated in Sections 1103.2 through 1103.9.

The provisions of this chapter shall not be construed to allow the elimination of fire protection systems or a reduction in the level of fire safety provided in buildings constructed in accordance with previously adopted codes.

1104.1 General.

Means of egress in existing buildings shall comply with the minimum egress requirements when specified in Table 1103.1 as further enumerated in Sections 1104.2 through 1104.24, and the building code that applied at the time of construction. Where the provisions of this chapter conflict with the building code that applied at the time of construction, the most restrictive provision shall apply. Existing buildings that were not required to comply with a building code at the time of construction shall comply with the minimum egress requirements when specified in Table 1103.1 as further enumerated in Sections 1104.2 through 1104.24.


----------



## BSSTG (Nov 6, 2013)

cda said:
			
		

> Yes and noProblem is you do not know what was original door hardware that was approved
> 
> Also, has the building changed over the years, use, remodel, etc
> 
> ...


Yea you know I had lunch with a couple of occupancy inspectors with Houston a couple of years back. Now that's all these guys did. They told me that they had all of the old archived codes and would actually apply them for these older structures. Interesting huh? I guess if that's all you did and had the codes for reference it would be simpler. I just don't figure how someone is supposed to figure what codes would apply and so forth. And what if there were no records to reference if a building was ever legal?

I do know a friend of mine opened a business in Houston about 20 years ago and didn't get a C/O. He then complained to the City about some poor drainage and they nabbed him. Everything had to be brought up to snuff as there the building was never inspected prior.

Then again in the 80's, we buillt the Borden Ice Cream plant in Houston. In 1995 Dreyers wanted to buy it but wouldn't without a C/O. The C/O was never issued in the first place. A whole lot of stuff had to be cleaned up to get the C/O for the sale to be approved and it was.

But these were both cases where the building never had legal occupancy to begin with. I get that.

But back to this door hardware thing. I'm going to talk to the powers that be and see about getting some backup. I think we should do some PSA's and follow up with some inspections. But that's me. I shutter to think someone will get caught in a fire and can't get out.

BSSTG


----------



## cda (Nov 6, 2013)

Yep

Have to love Houston, have beards stories about the city

There is something wrong with a city that six flags shuts down and the astrodome is tore down


----------



## BSSTG (Nov 6, 2013)

one of my favorite picsBS

View attachment 926


View attachment 926


/monthly_2013_11/DSCN0564.JPG.0114bc9869353425c298e63c0479f145.JPG


----------



## BSSTG (Nov 6, 2013)

cda said:
			
		

> yephave to love houston, have beards stories about the city
> 
> there is something wrong with a city that six flags shuts down and the astrodome is tore down


yep!

Bsstg


----------



## FM William Burns (Nov 10, 2013)

One other thing to always consider when evaluating existing structures is increased occupant loads.  As business succeed and decline over years occupancy increases and declines.  I have seen situations where exterior enclosed stairwells were required due to a lack in egress capacity that went unchecked for years.


----------

