• 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.

Egress Requirements for Students with Special Needs

LGreene

LGreene

REGISTERED
Joined
Oct 20, 2009
Messages
1,165
Location
San Miguel de Allende, Mexico
One of my coworkers is working with a school that has an incoming student with special needs who has a history of "running" - leaving the building during the school day. The school is very concerned about the safety of this child, but since the code requires free egress there are really no options without requesting a variance. I don't know how many teachers will typically be in the classroom, but that's obviously not within our control and since this has been a problem in the past, the level of staffing may not be sufficient.

I'm picturing the exit door from the classroom to the exterior. One solution could be an electromagnetic lock which unlocks on fire alarm and with a remote release that is under the control of the teacher.

Another possibility is a delayed egress system which unlocks 15 seconds after you push on it and unlocks immediately on fire alarm. The code requires an audible alarm, which would not work in this situation. I would propose a delayed egress lock without the audible alarm. Delayed egress is not allowed by the IBC in schools so it would require a variance regardless.

What are your thoughts on this? If one of these solutions would be acceptable to you, would you limit your approval to certain doors (ie. ok in the classroom but not on the gym)? What could be incorporated into the plan (ie. staff training) that would make the variance more acceptable to the AHJ?
 
Boy, this is a tough one.

"I'm picturing the exit door from the classroom to the exterior." Might be all right for classtime, but what about the lunchroom? The gymnasium for assemblies or gym class? And likely the worst of all, the recess playground?

Delay egress might be the best solution, but why disable the local alarm? I can understand the distraction is a nuisance, but how will teacher know the child has tried to violate the opening and started the 15 second delay?
 
Just how "special needs" is the child? It sounds like the child needs an assigned chaperone rather than an electronic system which ADA will pay for under certain circumstances.
 
As someone all ready said. Supervision. They are not going to let the child outside???

How many doors do you to whatever for this child 1, ,2,3????

Electic bell on door??

Cow bell on child
 
LARMGUY said:
Just how "special needs" is the child? It sounds like the child needs an assigned chaperone rather than an electronic system which ADA will pay for under certain circumstances.
Click to expand...
And just how does the ADA pay for this?
 
LGreene said:
What are your thoughts on this? If one of these solutions would be acceptable to you, would you limit your approval to certain doors (ie. ok in the classroom but not on the gym)? What could be incorporated into the plan (ie. staff training) that would make the variance more acceptable to the AHJ?
Click to expand...
This is actually a common problem at adult care facilities for the elderly, where different residents have different institutional needs. If your client is truly walking down the institutional needs path, and direct supervision is not an option, then you may want to ask the client why they are not treating this as an Institutional (I-4) Occupancy Group?

Solving your problem will hinge on the position of the AHJ, and I highly recommend you start there (after you have conducted your base research and developed design alternatives as you have suggested). If the AHJ is willing to consider 104.10 or 104.11 (2006 IBC), then one of the options you listed may have some merit. On the other hand, 'no' is still an answer for the AHJ, and one you should also consider in your design research.

Bon chance.
 
cda said:
Electic bell on door??

Cow bell on child
Click to expand...
Kudos on the much less dangerous options than the "invisible fence" solution I was dreaming up. Time to take off my John Cleese charrette cap.
 
cda said:
As someone all ready said. Supervision. They are not going to let the child outside???How many doors do you to whatever for this child 1, ,2,3????
Click to expand...
I'm sure the child will be allowed to go outside and will be supervised, but in a classroom full of kids it would be difficult to keep tabs on one child if there is free egress from the classroom to the exterior. If the teacher turns her back for a moment, he could be out the door. I have not seen the floor plan so I don't know how many doors are in question, but not more than a few. That's why I originally asked if the AHJs in the crowd would have different criteria for what would be allowed on the exterior classroom door vs. the exterior gym door.
 
Doorman said:
Boy, this is a tough one."I'm picturing the exit door from the classroom to the exterior." Might be all right for classtime, but what about the lunchroom? The gymnasium for assemblies or gym class? And likely the worst of all, the recess playground?

Delay egress might be the best solution, but why disable the local alarm? I can understand the distraction is a nuisance, but how will teacher know the child has tried to violate the opening and started the 15 second delay?
Click to expand...
Without the audible alarm, I think the child would stop pushing the panic or turning the lever, but one of my recommendations was that there could be an indicator light in a location that would be visible to the teacher but not right next to the door where the child could learn the cause and effect of playing with the door = light goes on. The teacher would also need an easy way to rearm the device.
 
LARMGUY said:
Just how "special needs" is the child? It sounds like the child needs an assigned chaperone rather than an electronic system which ADA will pay for under certain circumstances.
Click to expand...
All I know is that it is a child with Autism who has run away before.
 
Papio Bldg Dept said:
This is actually a common problem at adult care facilities for the elderly, where different residents have different institutional needs. If your client is truly walking down the institutional needs path, and direct supervision is not an option, then you may want to ask the client why they are not treating this as an Institutional (I-4) Occupancy Group?Solving your problem will hinge on the position of the AHJ, and I highly recommend you start there (after you have conducted your base research and developed design alternatives as you have suggested). If the AHJ is willing to consider 104.10 or 104.11 (2006 IBC), then one of the options you listed may have some merit. On the other hand, 'no' is still an answer for the AHJ, and one you should also consider in your design research.

Bon chance.
Click to expand...
In our school (not the school in question) there are about 600 kids, approximately 20 with special needs, and luckily none that have tried to run away. It's different from an elderly care facility because of the ratio of kids who need to be contained vs. other kids. In elderly care facilities the patients often wear a sensor which locks the doors when they approach. I don't know if that would be a possibility for this child or not but it's something to think about.
 
LGreene said:
What should they call it?
Click to expand...
some places do use the term "variance"

either ::

Alternative materials and methods

104.9 Alternative materials and methods. The provisions of

this code are not intended to prevent the installation of any

material or to prohibit any method of construction not specifically

prescribed by this code, provided that any such alternative

has been approved. The fire code official is authorized to

approve an alternative material or method of construction

where the fire code official finds that the proposed design is satisfactory

and complies with the intent of the provisions of this

code, and that the material, method or work offered is, for the

purpose intended, at least the equivalent of that prescribed in

this code in quality, strength, effectiveness, fire resistance,

durability and safety.

104.9.1 Research reports. Supporting data, when necessary

to assist in the approval of materials or assemblies not

specifically provided for in this code, shall consist of valid

research reports from approved sources.

or modification, which I do not think applies here::

104.8 Modifications. Whenever there are practical difficulties

involved in carrying out the provisions of this code, the fire

code official shall have the authority to grant modifications for

individual cases, provided the fire code official shall first find

that special individual reason makes the strict letter of this code

impractical and the modification is in compliance with the

intent and purpose of this code and that such modification does

not lessen health, life and fire safety requirements. The details

of action granting modifications shall be recorded and entered

in the files of the department of fire prevention.
 
LGreene said:
Would you allow hardware mounted above 48" in this case? How high is too high?
Click to expand...
the trouble is not enough info:

if this was the only child in the room, there could be a vast ways to do it, but if you have a special needs child main streaming, than you have to take care of all the children in the classroom, so I would say no to hardware over 48" if more children

how about a man trap?????
 
In my opinion, the life-safety needs of the many out weigh the inconvenience of proper staffing by the school district.

I will add that a fenced courtyard outside would solve the issue without compromising safety.

Of course there isn't door hardware involved in that solution.

But all the world isn't a nail.
 
brudgers, how will "...the life-safety needs of the many..." be met by creating a fenced enclosure outside of this egress door that, by inferrence, will have no gate?

:confused:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top