Second-Floor Office Suite with Travel Distance, Common Path, Dead End, and an Intervening Conference Room

Travel distance - compliant. Table 1017.2 permits 300 feet for Group B in a building equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system (200 feet unsprinklered). At 285 feet the design is inside the limit with 15 feet to spare. Note how thin that margin is: any reconfiguration that adds a corridor jog or a storage alcove at the remote end can push the suite out of compliance. The approval should note that the travel distance shown is a maximum, and that the 285 feet assumes the remote point as currently drawn.

Common path of egress travel - noncompliant. Table 1006.2.1 sets the common path limit for Group B at 75 feet unsprinklered and 100 feet sprinklered. The design is 110 feet: 10 feet over even with the sprinkler credit. The architect's "waiver" language is wrong as a matter of code administration - the sprinkler increase is already reflected in the 100-foot value in the table, and no further relief exists in the code text.

Where to measure. Common path begins at the most remote occupied point and ends at the point where two distinct paths to two separate exits become available, i.e., where the occupant can choose a direction and both choices lead to an exit. Measure it on the plan; do not accept a dimension to the corridor entrance if both exits are still reachable only through that one entrance.

Remedy. The cheapest fix is usually to relocate the northwest exit door so the two paths diverge earlier - often a few feet of door relocation. Adding a third exit door into the corridor near the middle of the suite also eliminates the common path. Demolishing and rebuilding the core is not required; the fix is geometric, not structural.

The dead end itself is fine. Dead-end corridors are limited to 20 feet in unsprinklered buildings and 50 feet where the building is equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system (Section 1020.5 in the current edition). At 45 feet this segment is within the 50-foot sprinklered limit with 5 feet of margin. Approve it, but record the dimension on the approved plans: a tenant revision that extends the corridor by 6 feet converts a compliant condition into a violation, and that is exactly the kind of change that gets made without a permit application.

The blanket statement is wrong and should be corrected in writing. There is no general sprinkler waiver of egress limits. What exists is a set of specific, enumerated increases and exceptions, each written into a specific table or section. Some limits are increased by sprinklers, some are not, and some are increased only for certain occupancies. An applicant who says "the sprinklers waive the limits" cannot be relied on to have checked which ones.

The teaching point for the review letter. This submittal contains one condition that passes because of a sprinkler credit (the dead end), one that passes on its own merits (travel distance), and one that fails even with the sprinkler credit (common path). If the reviewer had accepted the blanket claim, the common-path violation would have been missed entirely. Always resolve the sprinkler claim section by section: cite the table, cite the value, cite the dimension.

Additional check. Confirm the corridor width: 8 feet is generous and not an issue, but verify the corridor is not reduced below 44 inches at any door swing, and that the two enclosed stairs actually serve this floor as required exits.

The rule. Egress from a room may not pass through an adjoining or intervening room unless the path is unobstructed and the intervening space is genuinely part of the egress path under the code. The commonly applied limitation is that egress may pass through one intervening room only where that room's occupant load does not exceed 50 and the space is not a place of assembly or a high-hazard area. Egress may never pass through kitchens, storage rooms, restrooms, closets, or rooms subject to locking.

Apply the numbers. The conference room is 900 square feet. At the unconcentrated assembly factor of 15 net square feet per occupant for tables and chairs, the occupant load is 900 / 15 = 60. The applicant's own sheet says 60. That exceeds the 50-occupant threshold, so the exception is not available and the southeast door cannot be the second required exit for the suite.

The 'accessory' argument fails. Accessory status is a classification question, not an egress question. Even if the conference room is properly classified as a Group B accessory space, the code still restricts egress through intervening rooms by occupant load. An accessory room with 60 occupants is still an intervening room with 60 occupants.

Remedies.

1. Provide a direct door from the suite corridor into the southeast exit, independent of the conference room. This is usually a single wall penetration and the cheapest fix.
2. Reduce the conference room occupant load below 50 by design - smaller room, fixed seating at a larger factor, or removing the tables. This is fragile: the room will be re-furnished.
3. Convert the southeast door into a door from the conference room only and add a third exit from the suite. This changes the exit geometry and requires rechecking remoteness.

Also verify the conference room has its own compliant egress. At 60 occupants it needs two ways out on its own; if both its doors are the ones in question, the fix in option 1 solves both problems at once.