Means of egress question for public way

[rktect 1]

So, I have this E occupancy which has a rear of the building play ground. They decided to install a fence to enclose it. This went to the zoning administrator who approved it. I was later asked to go out and look at it. As I looked at it I said, you need to add panic hardware onto the fence gates since you would have moved 50 or more kids into this play ground area. The lock and latch need to go. The means of egress is required to terminate at a public way which would be the alley on one side and a side private driveway on the other in this case. The play ground area is roughly 30'x120' . Well, they are none too happy about this and of course the higher ups are getting called now.

But, I am 99.64% certain that I am correct in requiring the panic hardware for the E occupancy. What got me thinking was commercial swimming pool areas. I have been to many resorts and I generally see that the hardware is not panic hardware but a magna latch gate hardware. Where is it allowed in the code that an A use area (same as the E use area) allows for this magna latch gate hardware? Is this only specific to outdoor pool areas?

 

[ICE]

Assuming that the fence and gate serve as a security feature, will the gate be secure from the outside if it is equipped with panic hardware? If the fence and gate are chain link or slats, all it takes is a coat hanger and you are in.

 

[RLGA]

What is the orientation of the playground? If the 120-foot dimension is perpendicular to the exterior wall of the building, you could create a "safe dispersal area" per the exception to Section 1028.5.

 

[classicT]

1028.5 Access to a Public Way​

The exit discharge shall provide a direct and unobstructed access to a public way.​

Exception: Where access to a public way cannot be provided, a safe dispersal area shall be provided where all of the following are met:​

1. The area shall be of a size to accommodate not less than 5 square feet (0.46 m2) for each person.
2. The area shall be located on the same lot not less than 50 feet (15 240 mm) away from the building requiring egress.
3. The area shall be permanently maintained and identified as a safe dispersal area.
4. The area shall be provided with a safe and unobstructed path of travel from the building.

I am in agreement with Ron. Although, I doubt that the orientation of the playground is such that the 120' dimension is perpendicular to the building.

Do take note of IBC Section 1010.4. Gates must comply with the same requirements as doors.

1010.4 Gates​

Gates serving the means of egress system shall comply with the requirements of this section. Gates used as a component in a means of egress shall conform to the applicable requirements for doors.​

Exception: Horizontal sliding or swinging gates exceeding the 4-foot (1219 mm) maximum leaf width limitation are permitted in fences and walls surrounding a stadium.​

The school is likely concerned that with panic hardware, kids would be able to escape the confines of the playground. If that is the case, they will likely not be pleased by Section 1010.2.13. Delayed egress is often a proposed solution; however, is limited to 50 occupants in Group E.

1010.2.13 Delayed Egress​

Delayed egress locking systems shall be permitted to be installed on doors serving the following occupancies in buildings that are equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or an approved automatic smoke or heat detection system installed in accordance with Section 907.​

1. Group B, F, I, M, R, S and U occupancies.
2. Group E classrooms with an occupant load of less than 50.
3. In courtrooms in Group A-3 and B occupancies, delayed egress locking systems shall be permitted to be installed on exit or exit access doors, other than the main exit or exit access door, in buildings that are equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1.

That said, IMHO, the code official would be well within the intent of the code to allow for the gate to be equipped with a delayed egress locking mechanism. The mechanism, of panic hardware type, would benefit from a visual and auditory alarm to alert the staff of a child attempting to exit the play area via the gate. Should provide a limited delay sufficient for the staff to reach the fleeing child and avert their escape but be limited in time so as to not prevent egress via the public way as occupants disperse during an emergency.

 

[Paul Sweet]

I've had projects where panic hardware was required on fences. They put metal plates behind the panic hardware to make it very difficult to operate it from the outside. (I didn't say impossible because bad guys can be very clever.)

 

[classicT]

I've had projects where panic hardware was required on fences. They put metal plates behind the panic hardware to make it very difficult to operate it from the outside. (I didn't say impossible because bad guys can be very clever.)

(Ignore the cable and padlock)

 

[Yikes]

Regarding posts #3 and 4:
If 1028.5 exception #2 can be utilized at 50'+ away from the building, then exit discharge is technically "complete". Any further gates beyond that are not required for means of egress (though they may still be used for ingress, and therefore the panic hardware would not be required.

Regarding security panels around the panic bars:
When you have a 5' or 6' high fence, my experience on other projects is that a determined trespasser just hops the fence rather than trying to manipulate the hardware with a coat hanger or other device.

 

[RLGA]

Regarding posts #3 and 4:
If 1028.5 exception #2 can be utilized at 50'+ away form the building, then exit discharge is technically "complete". any further gates beyond that are not required for means of egress (though they may still be used for ingress, and therefore the panic hardware would not be required.

Regarding security panels around the panic bars:
When you have a 5' or 6' high fence, my experience on other projects is that a determined trespasser just hops the fence rather than trying to manipulate the hardware with a coat hanger or other device.

Just FYI, there is only one exception that has four conditions, so all four are required. But, to respond to your first comment, you’re correct in that the safe dispersal area is the termination of the exit discharge, and the gates would not require panic devices.

Regarding your second comment, this is why I don’t understand the push back on the panic devices. Either way, the fence can be circumvented. The only opposition I could see would be the added cost of the additional features to make panic hardware work and the cost of maintaining the hardware.

 

[north star]

4 4 + 4 4

rktect 1,

Is the E Occ. Group playground area "officially designated" as a
Safe Dispersal Area for the MOE [ RE: Section 1028.5, # 3 ] ?

4 4 + 4 4

 

[e hilton]

Regarding security panels around the panic bars:
When you have a 5' or 6' high fence, my experience on other projects is that a determined trespasser just hops the fence rather than trying to manipulate the hardware with a coat hanger or other device.

Just as important, panic bars give the truant kids a way to leave the school property.

 

[Sifu]

Did an I-4 recently with a similar issue, they didn't want the panic so they made and identified a safe dispersal area, 50' 2" from the building.

 

[rktect 1]

We fixed the E occupancy issue. Had a meeting with the owners. DCFS will not allow them more than 37 children currently and only up to a maximum of 99 children some time in the future. They have to apply each time to DCFS in order to have more children at the daycare. I told them to request a reduction of their buildings occupant load so as to not exceed 99 to be posted at the front door and 49 to be posted in the rear play ground area. Our annual fire inspector should be on top of this since he makes the occupant placards.

Now, what about those swimming pool areas where we know the occupant loads are over 50?

 

[classicT]

Just FYI, there is only one exception that has four conditions, so all four are required. But, to respond to your first comment, you’re correct in that the safe dispersal area is the termination of the exit discharge, and the gates would not require panic devices.

Regarding your second comment, this is why I don’t understand the push back on the panic devices. Either way, the fence can be circumvented. The only opposition I could see would be the added cost of the additional features to make panic hardware work and the cost of maintaining the hardware.

Agreed 100%.

...shall be provided where all of the following are met

My thought on the push back on the panic devices, and this comes from my own experiences, is that they are trying to keep young children from running off. Minimum security intended to keep honest folks honest is provided by the fence, so a locked gate does provided some minimal security and helps control access via preferred routes. Regarding the panic hardware, there is push back because even a young child can figure out how these work and successfully operate. So it becomes an issue of the stray kid who wants to wander. As I suggested above, if this comes down to a battle, it may be easy to offer up a delayed egress locking system. Gives staff enough time to collect an escapee.

 

[Sifu]

We fixed the E occupancy issue. Had a meeting with the owners. DCFS will not allow them more than 37 children currently and only up to a maximum of 99 children some time in the future. They have to apply each time to DCFS in order to have more children at the daycare. I told them to request a reduction of their buildings occupant load so as to not exceed 99 to be posted at the front door and 49 to be posted in the rear play ground area. Our annual fire inspector should be on top of this since he makes the occupant placards.

Now, what about those swimming pool areas where we know the occupant loads are over 50?

Same codes apply. I have always required panic devices and can't recall any pushback, but I have also never had anyone propose a safe dispersal area for a pool as an alternative. Not sure where you would measure from for the 50' requirement. Top of my head it would be the edge of the occupied deck?? I never considered it before but it would seem to be a viable option.

 

[Mr. Inspector]

Doesn't this gate need to be an accessible egress too?
Jest did a plan review for a pool. Not only did they need two exit gates, they needed two accessible exits. They did not want to make an accessible sidewalk from the second exit to a public way because it would have to go half way around the outside of the fence, about 100' long., so I told them they could have a Exterior Area for Assisted Rescue.

 

[Yikes]

Did an I-4 recently with a similar issue, they didn't want the panic so they made and identified a safe dispersal area, 50' 2" from the building.

Are you saying the fence was 50'-2" away from the building, such that the safe dispersal area was only 2" wide?

 

[classicT]

Are you saying the fence was 50'-2" away from the building, such that the safe dispersal area was only 2" wide?

I hope that isn't the case. The safe dispersal area has specific requirements in 1028.5, including 5sf per person. The entire required area of the dispersal area would need to be at least 50' from the building.

1028.5 Access to a Public Way​

The exit discharge shall provide a direct and unobstructed access to a public way. Exception: Where access to a public way cannot be provided, a safe dispersal area shall be provided where all of the following are met:

1. The area shall be of a size to accommodate not less than 5 square feet (0.46 m2) for each person.
2. The area shall be located on the same lot not less than 50 feet (15 240 mm) away from the building requiring egress.
3. The area shall be permanently maintained and identified as a safe dispersal area.
4. The area shall be provided with a safe and unobstructed path of travel from the building.

 

[Sifu]

Are you saying the fence was 50'-2" away from the building, such that the safe dispersal area was only 2" wide?

No, the safe dispersal area started at 50' and extended away from the building to the perimeter of the fence. Don't recall the area and size but it accomodated the occupants at 5sf²/person. There were several gates but I can understand the desire to no use a device that a child could easily operate to escape the lima bean lunch.