• Welcome to The Building Code Forum

    Your premier resource for building code knowledge.

    This forum remains free to the public thanks to the generous support of our Sawhorse Members and Corporate Sponsors. Their contributions help keep this community thriving and accessible.

    Want enhanced access to expert discussions and exclusive features? Learn more about the benefits here.

    Ready to upgrade? Log in and upgrade now.

When is a glass panel required in an exterior door of a public building.

Jmb said:
this is barely passing, but that is all they need to meet code.
Your scenario is a good example: vision panel not required but would be a good idea
Click to expand...

I agree with the above comment, but I wouldn't give it the same analogy as a D- grade.

* I use 87 octane in my car instead of 89 or 91, but I don't refer to it as D- gasoline.
* I see a football player make a catch with his toes just barely in bounds, I don't call him a D- player.
* If I buy a new car Toyota instead of a Lexus, I don't assume the Toyota is a D- car. I bought a car that is street legal, and able to do the job it was designed for. If I want a vehicle with more features, including safety features like collision avoidance monitoring, that is my choice, but it doesn't mean a vehicle without this equipment is a D- vehicle.
 
Yikes said:
I agree with the above comment, but I wouldn't give it the same analogy as a D- grade.

* I use 87 octane in my car instead of 89 or 91, but I don't refer to it as D- gasoline.
* I see a football player make a catch with his toes just barely in bounds, I don't call him a D- player.
* If I buy a new car Toyota instead of a Lexus, I don't assume the Toyota is a D- car. I bought a car that is street legal, and able to do the job it was designed for. If I want a vehicle with more features, including safety features like collision avoidance monitoring, that is my choice, but it doesn't mean a vehicle without this equipment is a D- vehicle.
Click to expand...


OK, maybe a D+
 
Ok, so given the choice, you would prefer a Permitable set of drawings to a biddable or buildable set if they were more expensive to produce?
 
We are getting slightly off-topic here from the original post. It is entirely possible that the school district never intended to have viewport windows in the doors, perhaps for value engineering reasons. This thread was starting to imply that the architect did barely legal, substandard work and gave it no consideration, when in reality none of us know the background that went into the decisions regarding doors.

In my own practice, I have different clients with different needs for plans. When I prepare a proposal and fee for services, I ask a client if they generally want one of three levels of design service:
(1) basic plans (life-safety only); this may be chosen by clients who self-build and who do repetitive construction types, with the same subs. Oftentimes on smaller projects, the MEP is design-build.
(2) biddable plans, which includes #1 above, plus sufficient scope to establish a competitive, apples-to-apples bid. This includes interdisciplinary coordination.
(3) highly detailed plans, which includes #2 above, but also a significant amount of additional design to realize a unique aesthetic vision. An example may include a conference room, where the ceiling finish pattern is coordinated with sprinkler heads, projection equipment, etc.
 
Yikes said:
We are getting slightly off-topic here from the original post. It is entirely possible that the school district never intended to have viewport windows in the doors, perhaps for value engineering reasons. This thread was starting to imply that the architect did barely legal, substandard work and gave it no consideration, when in reality none of us know the background that went into the decisions regarding doors.
Click to expand...
Agreed, it could be prone to impact and breakage or security may also be a required feature. Not knowing the specifics, all we can do is hypothesize.
 
ADAguy said:
signs only assist the sighted.
Click to expand...
Then why is brail required on signage per codes.
Section 703 Signs of the 2010 Standard for Accessibility

703.1 General. Signs shall comply with 703. Where both visual and tactile characters are required, either one sign with both visual and tactile characters, or two separate signs, one with visual, and one with tactile characters, shall be provided.

703.2 Raised Characters. Raised characters shall comply with 703.2 and shall be duplicated in braille complying with 703.3. Raised characters shall be installed in accordance with 703.4.
 
george.scarfe said:
Then why is brail required on signage per codes.
Section 703 Signs of the 2010 Standard for Accessibility

703.1 General. Signs shall comply with 703. Where both visual and tactile characters are required, either one sign with both visual and tactile characters, or two separate signs, one with visual, and one with tactile characters, shall be provided.

703.2 Raised Characters. Raised characters shall comply with 703.2 and shall be duplicated in braille complying with 703.3. Raised characters shall be installed in accordance with 703.4.
Click to expand...
Great first post George! Welcome to THE Forum!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top