Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSpecial Inspection Correspondence 1992-12-21 ,,,. /' , . / December 21, 1992 Barry Kosaris Fun Base I 2090 Olympic street Springfield, Or. 97477 RE: Building Division Inspection regarding exits from recreation facility Dear Barry: At the request of the Springfield Fire Marshals Office, we have conducted an inspection of your existing recreation facility to determine the effect on exit requirements when the anticipated closure of the Springfield Mall occurs. Currently your facility enjoys the benefit of a common wall with the Mall, which provides alternative exit capabilities. Closure of the Mall will delete this exit capability, and leave your facility with its only exits on the West side which fronts on the parking lot. The State Structural Specialty Code (Sec. 3303-a) requires that facilities with an occupant load of greater than 50 but fewer than 501 be provided with two exits. The required width of these exits in feet shall be not less than the total occupant load served divided by 50 (in your facility we calculated the occupant load at 210 for a required exit width of 4.2', but since two exits not less than 3' wide are required your minimum exit with shall be 6'). The Code further states that the exits shall be placed a distance apart equal to not less than one half of the length of the maximum overall diagonal dimension of the building or area to be served measured in a straight line between exits. In reviewing the existing exiting provided on the West side of your facility, we found that there are three pairs of 3' doors for a total exit width of 18'. This exceeds the total required exit width threefold. When measuring the distance between exits, however, we find that the required separation (1/2 the diagonal) is 100', but the actual separation is only 75'-3". Based on the interior arrangement of your facility, we see no advantage in increasing the separation of the exit doorways on the West side since they still exit from the. same primary space. We would prefer to see an interim arrangement made with the Mall to allow for access to the exit corridor which leads to the East side of the building near the Northeast corner of your facility. As we discussed with you on the site, perhaps a temporary partition wall could be constructed to divert users to this exit corridor, and not allow access in the Mall. . , . Please discuss the exit situation with the Mall owner, and with the owner of the building in which your facility is located, and let us know what you propose with regard to compliance with the exit provisions of the Code. Your prompt response is appreciated, since it is our understanding the Mall closure is scheduled for the first of the year. sincerely, Pleger, Plans Examiner cc: Jim Henley, Deputy Fire Marshal Barney McCabe, Mall Manager