Date |
Text |
2023-07-17 14:38:18 | THIS PLAN WAS REVIEWED AND FAILED BY PETER LEDUC, FIRE |
| MARSHAL, WITH THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS: |
| |
| 1) THERE IS AN INDICATION OF WHAT APPEARS TO BE A |
| DOUBLE SWING ENTRY DOOR, # 1, HOWEVER, IF IT WERE TO |
| SWING OUT IT APPEAR TO RESTRICT THE CORRIDOR EGRESS |
| WIDTH. |
| |
| PER NFPA 1 |
| |
| 1.7.12 PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS. |
| |
| 1.7.12.1 THE AHJ SHALL HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO REQUIRE |
| PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH |
| APPLICABLE CODES AND STANDARDS |
| |
| 1.7.12.6 PLANS SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE AHJ PRIOR TO |
| THE ALTERATION OF THE MEANS OF EGRESS OR FIRE |
| PROTECTION SYSTEMS OF ANY EXISTING BUILDING. |
| |
| PER NFPA 101 CHAPTER 7, MEANS OF EGRESS |
| |
| 7.2.1.4.3 DOOR LEAF ENCROACHMENT |
| 7.2.1.4.3.1 DURING ITS SWING, ANY DOOR LEAF IN A MEANS |
| OF EGRESS SHALL |
| LEAVE NOT LESS THAN ONE-HALF OF THE REQUIRED WIDTH OF |
| AN AISLE, A CORRIDOR, |
| A PASSAGEWAY, OR A LANDING UNOBSTRUCTED, UNLESS BOTH OF |
| THE FOLLOWING |
| CONDITIONS ARE MET: |
| (1) THE DOOR OPENING PROVIDES ACCESS TO A STAIR IN AN |
| EXISTING |
| BUILDING. |
| (2) THE DOOR OPENING MEETS THE REQUIREMENT OF |
| 7.2.1.4.3.2. |
| 7.2.1.4.3.2 WHEN FULLY OPEN, ANY DOOR LEAF IN A MEANS |
| OF EGRESS SHALL |
| NOT PROJECT MORE THAN 7 IN. (180 MM) INTO THE REQUIRED |
| WIDTH OF AN AISLE, |
| A CORRIDOR, A PASSAGEWAY, OR A LANDING, UNLESS THE DOOR |
| LEAF IS EQUIPPED |
| WITH AN APPROVED SELF-CLOSING DEVICE AND IS NOT |
| REQUIRED BY THE PROVISIONS |
| OF 7.2.1.4.2 TO SWING IN THE DIRECTION OF EGRESS |
| TRAVEL. |
| |
| |
| PLEASE REVIEW AND CORRECT AND/OR PROVIDE THE REMINAING |
| CORRIDOR WIDTH DIMENSION IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE |
| REQUIREMENT. |
| |
| |
| 2) WHEN RESUBMITTING, PLEASE PROVIDE PLAN SHEET |
| REVISION CLOUDS OR NUMBERED NARRATIVE RESPONSES TO THE |
| ABOVE. |
| |
| |
| 3) ADDITIONAL COMMENTS MAY BE PROVIDED ON THE |
| RE-SUBMITTAL OF THE ABOVE. |
| |
| |
| PETER LEDUC |
| FIRE MARSHAL |
| 561-804-4709 |
| [email protected] |
| |