Access to and Egress from the Roof

[LGreene]

People ask me all the time if it's ok to lock the door to the roof. Most facilities want to prevent access from the stairwell to the roof for safety reasons and to deter vandalism, and also want to prevent access from the roof to the stairwell for increased security. The codes seem to allow that unless the roof is used as occupied space, but I've read several articles lately about people who tried to get to the roof during a fire and found the door locked. Some of them died, one local woman was saved by a firefighter after she passed out at the door. On the other hand, I read an article a few months ago about a toddler who wandered up to the roof and fell off.

What type of lock do you prefer to see on a door to an unoccupied roof?

Here are some code excerpts for your reference:

NFPA 101 – 2006 Edition: 7.2.1.5.8 If a stair enclosure allows access to the roof of the building, the door to the roof either shall be kept locked or shall allow re-entry from the roof.

IBC-2003 and 2006: 1018.1 … For the purposes of 780 CMR 10.00, occupied roofs shall be provided with exits as required for stories. The required number of exits from any story, basement or individual space shall be maintained until arrival at grade or the public way.

 

[FM William Burns]

Card access or coded with power interruption operation, fire alarm interface and security alarm interface.

 

[LGreene]

Thanks FMWB...it sounds like you're describing a fail safe electrified lockset which unlocks on fire alarm and power failure. Is that application required by code in your jurisdiction? If it's a preference (not a written requirement), do you require it on every building or only certain occupancy types or certain building heights? How does the security alarm interface work?

 

[FM William Burns]

They were used when I was in High Rise_ville and were permitted by code (101). Regarding the security measures, in the condos and high rises on the beach and intercoastal waterway they were supervised/monitored through the video and addressible security systems in the guard's tour station sharred by the fire command center where the FACP were typically located.

 

[permitguy]

There a alot of variables to someone trying to get to the roof in a fire and dying because the door is locked.

For instance, was the access in a stairwell? If so, why were they not traveling down to grade? If smoke/heat/flame was prohibiting them from continuing down, then there were other code violations that could have been addressed by a proactive prevention program (doors blocked, improper fire exit hardware, storage in stairwell, improperly maintained protection/detection sytems, etc). Were there other areas of refuge or paths of egress that the occupants did not know about because they hadn't been trained on them (safety wardens, fire drills, etc.).

The overwhelming majority of buildings in my jurisdiction have the roof doors locked with a regular lockset, or padlocks if it's a hatch style access. We have keys in the FD keybox, but occupants would have no access to them. From a black-and-white code perspective, nothing prohibits this practice. The roof is not recognized as an egress component.

 

[LGreene]

I think in the most recent case here in Boston, one of the problems was that building residents didn't respond to the alarms right away, and when they tried to exit the stairwell was full of smoke. I don't if there were open stairwell doors or other things that affected egress.

Here are few links to articles & news reports on the Boston fire:

http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2010/04/09/playing_back_her_dramatic_fire_rescue/

http://www.thebostonchannel.com/news/23090295/detail.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R082avmkAgo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F7b5sOdJ2DU&NR=1

And here's an excerpt from one of the articles: "Her main condition was smoke inhalation. She attempted to go down -- she was on the 10th floor when the fire occurred. She tried to go down the stairway to get out of the building and it was just too dark and too much smoke for her. So she switched directions and headed to the roof but she couldn't open the roof door."

 

[permitguy]

Very telling articles. First, the occupants didn't evacuate upon alarm. Had they done so, the rescue wouldn't have been necessary at all. Second, there were areas on the floors that did not contain smoke, but the occupants only proceeded there when taken by the FD. They were unaware that proceeding into a smoky stairwell was a worse option than staying put where there was no smoke. Third, smoke was filling the stairwell in less than 15 minutes from the time of the alarm. Obviously something is very wrong when the stairwells in a 10 story building are filled with smoke within 15 minutes from the time the fire alarms first go off. The articles mentioned that code officials are evaluating the building to determine whether it can be safely occupied. In my jurisdiction, the answer would be "Not a chance in hell".

If everything that was supposed to have happened had actually happened, the accessibility of the roof wouldn't have been a factor. As far as I'm concerned, if a building is so dangerous that the roof must remain accessible as a last resort to the occupants, then that building should be shut down until that danger is abated.