# Is it a dead end corridor?



## BayPointArchitect (Jul 31, 2019)

My jurisdiction enforces both the NFPA 101 and the IBC.
The dead end corridor limit for a new non-sprinkled office building is only 20 feet according to NFPA 101 Table 7.6.
The IBC section 1018.4 has the same dead end corridor limit of 20 feet.  But that paragraph does start with, "Where more than one exit or exit access doorway is required..."
So can I conclude that we may dismiss anything that might otherwise be construed as a dead end corridor within a building that requires only one exit?

Thanks again

ICC Certified Plan Reviewer
NFPA Certified Fire Plan Examiner


----------



## cda (Jul 31, 2019)

Well depends 

Technically your example is not dead end.

But for that example only.  I would not apply that answer to every layout


----------



## BayPointArchitect (Jul 31, 2019)

Technically speaking, why is it not a dead end corridor?  I might panic, run down the hallway and die in the restroom while trying to find the exit.


----------



## cda (Jul 31, 2019)

BayPointArchitect said:


> Technically speaking, why is it not a dead end corridor?  I might panic, run down the hallway and die in the restroom while trying to find the exit.



It your example,,, it only requires one exit,,,

So dead end only applies when two exits required.


----------



## cda (Jul 31, 2019)

https://medium.com/@goSkwerl/what-is-a-dead-end-corridor-fbe9967c48c2


----------



## BayPointArchitect (Jul 31, 2019)

Thanks CDA.  I learned something very basic today.  Now I wish I could find an NFPA forum that would clear things up for me.


----------



## ADAguy (Jul 31, 2019)

Good stuff "U"all.


----------



## cda (Jul 31, 2019)

BayPointArchitect said:


> Thanks CDA.  I learned something very basic today.  Now I wish I could find an NFPA forum that would clear things up for me.




Good luck on that 

NFPA runs one answers are not great, if you get one 

I would say same comment for dead end, for NFPA 101


----------



## cda (Jul 31, 2019)

Let me look at the NFPA handbook


----------



## cda (Jul 31, 2019)

BayPointArchitect said:


> Thanks CDA.  I learned something very basic today.  Now I wish I could find an NFPA forum that would clear things up for me.




Well the NFPA handbook was no help, but seems to agree only applies if two exits are required


----------



## e hilton (Aug 1, 2019)

cda ... am i missing something?  In your attachment there are 2 diagrams that try to illustrate dead ends: a hallway and an elevator lobby.  Both have a note stating they are dead ends. But both also have a dimension line indicating the length as 20 ft or less.


----------



## cda (Aug 1, 2019)

e hilton said:


> cda ... am i missing something?  In your attachment there are 2 diagrams that try to illustrate dead ends: a hallway and an elevator lobby.  Both have a note stating they are dead ends. But both also have a dimension line indicating the length as 20 ft or less.




I guess they are trying to say/ show two things

A dead end

And that it is not a dead end if less than 20


----------



## TheCommish (Aug 1, 2019)

I see the key to the questions is the number of exits required. All corridors would be a dead end at over 20 feet if the dead end requirement applies to those instances that the occ load allowed a single exit.


----------



## BayPointArchitect (Aug 1, 2019)

Tomorrow I will try to illustrate the NFPA compliant 20’ corridor (dead end) that extends into the same 2,600 S.F. office building.  It will look ridiculous.


----------



## e hilton (Aug 1, 2019)

Can you post it as a jpg, I'm having problems opening the pdf.


----------



## cda (Aug 1, 2019)

BayPointArchitect said:


> Tomorrow I will try to illustrate the NFPA compliant 20’ corridor (dead end) that extends into the same 2,600 S.F. office building.  It will look ridiculous.




If the front doors are there it is still not a problem.


----------



## BayPointArchitect (Aug 2, 2019)

According to NFPA dead end corridor limit of 20', any building with only one exit will not have a hallway beyond the front door that exceeds 20'.  That seems ridiculous to me.


----------



## cda (Aug 2, 2019)

BayPointArchitect said:


> According to NFPA dead end corridor limit of 20', any building with only one exit will not have a hallway beyond the front door that exceeds 20'.  That seems ridiculous to me.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Will you post the section of NFPA. You get that from 

And edition


----------



## e hilton (Aug 2, 2019)

Awesome design!   And thanks for the jpg.


----------



## cda (Aug 2, 2019)

7.5.1.5 Exit access shall be arranged so that there are no dead ends in corridors, unless permitted by, and limited to the lengths specified in, Chapters 11 through 43.




A dead end exists in a corridor where the corridor continues past an exit and creates a pocket into which an occupant might travel. The occupant then recognizes there is no exit at that end of the pocket and is forced into retracing the original path to reach the exit. Although relatively short dead-end corridors are permitted for all occupancies by the chapter applicable to that occupancy.

Not sure what the commentary means by this::  """While a dead end is similar to a common path of travel, a dead end can exist where there is no path of travel from an occupied space ''   BUT once again it is commentary.


----------



## cda (Aug 2, 2019)

BayPointArchitect said:


> According to NFPA dead end corridor limit of 20', any building with only one exit will not have a hallway beyond the front door that exceeds 20'.  That seems ridiculous to me.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




It is not a corridor


----------



## Builder Bob (Aug 2, 2019)

Per IBC , it is not a corridor since the building/space  meets the criteria for a single egress.


NFPA 101 is more difficult to navigate - This is for a new business


----------



## IJHumberson (Aug 6, 2019)

cda said:


> Not sure what the commentary means by this:: """While a dead end is similar to a common path of travel, a dead end can exist where there is no path of travel from an occupied space '' BUT once again it is commentary.



cda, what they are referring to is the situation where you may have an 'offshoot' off a corridor to get to the mechanical room(s), elevator machine room(s), or other areas that are not not normally occupied. Even though those areas have no means of egress path of travel from an occupied space, the 'offshoot' is still counted as a dead-end corridor, and subject to the maximum permitted dead-end length based on the occupancy classification.


----------



## cda (Aug 6, 2019)

IJHumberson said:


> cda, what they are referring to is the situation where you may have an 'offshoot' off a corridor to get to the mechanical room(s), elevator machine room(s), or other areas that are not not normally occupied. Even though those areas have no means of egress path of travel from an occupied space, the 'offshoot' is still counted as a dead-end corridor, and subject to the maximum permitted dead-end length based on the occupancy classification.





I would agree 

If the offshoot is open to the corridor.


If I have to walk through a door to get to the offshoot,,,,   Like in the examples posted,,,

Than no it is not a dead end issue


----------



## BayPointArchitect (Aug 7, 2019)

cda said:


> I would agree
> 
> If the offshoot is open to the corridor.
> 
> ...



CDA, While I would normally agree with you, our local Fire Marshal received an interpretation from NFPA that says otherwise.  NFPA interpretation said that inserting a door does not interrupt the length of the corridor and it does not eliminate the dead end issue.  Before our State Fire Marshal received that interpretation (more than two years ago), they would advise folks to introduce a door with a sign "NOT AN EXIT".  But that is no longer a solution.


----------



## cda (Aug 7, 2019)

BayPointArchitect said:


> CDA, While I would normally agree with you, our local Fire Marshal received an interpretation from NFPA that says otherwise.  NFPA interpretation said that inserting a door does not interrupt the length of the corridor and it does not eliminate the dead end issue.  Before our State Fire Marshal received that interpretation (more than two years ago), they would advise folks to introduce a door with a sign "NOT AN EXIT".  But that is no longer a solution.




Well that sounds like a general interpretation !!!!  I do not think the is code to back it up.

I could see if there is a lengthy corridor, and you just install one door across it,   which would not allow egress in both directions, you could create a dead end issue.


So is the design to NFPA or IBC????   If IBC, than not sure how NFPA gets involved.

Plus, there is always the appeal process.


I mean you can walk into a lot of high rises, and walk down a corridor, with say multiple tenants on the same floor, each has a door to their suite, and say their suite is 70 feet deep.

Dead end corridor????  Even though they have a front door, to block people from coming in????

Anyway


----------



## Rick18071 (Aug 9, 2019)

So if you have a corridor with many doors along the walls that go into other corridors you would count them all as one corridor?  The doors make the next corridor a separate enclosed exit access

CORRIDOR. An enclosed exit access component that
defines and provides a path of egress travel.


----------



## cda (Aug 9, 2019)

Boy,,,

We keep beating a “dead end corridor”


https://knowyourmeme.com/photos/861737-beating-a-dead-horse


----------



## e hilton (Aug 9, 2019)

Bad horsie.  Bad, bad horsie.


----------



## JPohling (Aug 9, 2019)

unless two exits are required you cannot have a dead end corridor.
we use cross corridor doors all the time to eliminate dead end situations


----------



## Rick18071 (Aug 9, 2019)

So what is the point of the dead end corridor rule if you just need to add a door in the middle of a 100' long dead end corridor to make two 50' corridors?


----------



## cda (Aug 9, 2019)

Rick18071 said:


> So what is the point of the dead end corridor rule if you just need to add a door in the middle of a 100' long dead end corridor to make two 50' corridors?




So code consultants have a job and plan reviewers have to pause a minute.

Just like building a Building one sq ft less so a fire sprinkler system is not required


----------



## Rick18071 (Aug 9, 2019)

Should we require the doors that I mentioned above in post 31 to have automatic door closures without a hold open door device or would it OK to just leave them open. In other words are they still two separate corridors if the doors are always open?

I'm asking because I did a plan review where there was a dead end corridor over 50' long and I never thought of telling the designer that they could add a door in the corridor to make it two corridors.


----------



## cda (Aug 9, 2019)

Rick18071 said:


> Should we require the doors that I mentioned above in post 31 to have automatic door closures without a hold open door device or would it OK to just leave them open. In other words are they still two separate corridors if the doors are always open?
> 
> I'm asking because I did a plan review where there was a dead end corridor over 50' long and I never thought of telling the designer that they could add a door in the corridor to make it two corridors.



If exiting is required both ways, than:

Normally you need two doors

That swing in opposite direction


If only required one way 

I would not allow the door holder and require self closing


----------



## e hilton (Aug 10, 2019)

I would not allow the door holder

Even if it was tied into the fire alarm system?


----------



## cda (Aug 10, 2019)

e hilton said:


> I would not allow the door holder
> 
> Even if it was tied into the fire alarm system?




The fire alarm is not always activated, so if the mass plays follow the leader, they would could go down the dead end,,,,,

Since the door was open.


----------



## Rick18071 (Aug 12, 2019)

cda said:


> I would not allow the door holder and require self closing



I would like to require this but what section would I quote if I wanted to require this?

And why would't the same rule require for all doors into a corridor to have to be self closing?

CORRIDOR. An *enclosed* exit access component that
defines and provides a path of egress travel.


----------



## cda (Aug 12, 2019)

Rick18071 said:


> I would like to require this but what section would I quote if I wanted to require this?
> 
> And why would't the same rule require for all doors into a corridor to have to be self closing?
> 
> ...




You quote the dead end corridor section, and if they have a smart consultant, the consultant says, Hay can i use a two doors, that swing in opposite directions, or if it is to cut people off from, turning down a short section of corridor can i just put a door there....
You look at it, and if it gets rid of a dead end corridor, get the Stamp out.

And, since you are the approving person, approve it with no holder and self closing, or not approved.


Or if they need a hint, and you want to give it to them, to resolve the problem, drop the hint on how to fix it.


----------



## cda (Aug 12, 2019)

Rick18071 said:


> I would like to require this but what section would I quote if I wanted to require this?
> 
> And why would't the same rule require for all doors into a corridor to have to be self closing?
> 
> ...



"""And why would't the same rule require for all doors into a corridor to have to be self closing?""


Well if the door is not there to resolve a dead end issue, not required,  and or,,, back to what some people are calling a "dead end condition"


----------



## Rick18071 (Aug 12, 2019)

I'm thinking of a plan review that I did before (B not sprinkled, one exit, 30 occupants, one 30' corridor down the middle with offices off of it, one exit at the end) and I did not think that they could divide a 30' corridor into two 15' corridors with just a door to make two separate corridors so the dead end would not be over the allowed 20'. I'm only asking because I am required to quote the sections of the code when doing a plan review. And if they are adding doors to divide a corridor into two corridors I would like to require auto door closer because I think it would be a good idea but I need to say where in the code it is required.
Why would 2 doors be needed to go both directions if the exit is only one way?


----------



## cda (Aug 12, 2019)

Rick18071 said:


> I'm thinking of a plan review that I did before (B not sprinkled, one exit, 30 occupants, one 30' corridor down the middle with offices off of it, one exit at the end) and I did not think that they could divide a 30' corridor into two 15' corridors with just a door to make two separate corridors so the dead end would not be over the allowed 20'. I'm only asking because I am required to quote the sections of the code when doing a plan review. And if they are adding doors to divide a corridor into two corridors I would like to require auto door closer because I think it would be a good idea but I need to say where in the code it is required.
> Why would 2 doors be needed to go both directions if the exit is only one way?




I tried to put the disclaimer in

Yes if exit travel is only one way, than one door.

But normally a door is added to block access to a possible dead end.



Still do not think dead end applies here:::

“”” did before (B not sprinkled, one exit, 30 occupants, one 30' corridor down the middle with offices off of it, one exit at the end) and I did not think that they could divide a 30' corridor into two 15' corridors with just a door to make two separate corridors so the dead end would not be over the allowed 20'. “””


----------



## Builder Bob (Aug 13, 2019)

Sorry, I do not buy into the door in the middle diving the corridor into two halves..... the path of travel remains the same for egress, you didn't';t change a thing.


----------



## cda (Aug 13, 2019)

Builder Bob said:


> Sorry, I do not buy into the door in the middle diving the corridor into two halves..... the path of travel remains the same for egress, you didn't';t change a thing.




The length of the corridor is shorter


So walking off the corridor, the door being there takes away the dead end corridor issue.

Like a wall being there.

Thought is people would turnaround and not go through the door,,,

Especially if there was no exit sign above it.


If only one exit is required,,, I do not think there is a dead end corridor condition.


----------

