• 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.

Question of Use I-2 or I-3

Architect1281

Architect1281

REGISTERED
Joined
Nov 16, 2009
Messages
782
Location
Foster, Rhode Island, United States
A question is arising and an opinion is requested

I-2 Use psychiatric care for life or until deemed competent to stand trial.

and there is the key not yet convicted due to inability to comprehend the trial process (maybe)

these are not persons awaiting sanity and possible conviction on car theft but much much worse.

they just happen to still be considered innocent.

The well meaning caretaker division chief thinks we should group as I-2 more like awaiting surgery.

The persons under custodial care are allowed to wander thier small smoke compartment but they aren't allowed to go to the lunch wagon for coffee.

If one is unaccounted for you are more likely to call the National Guard rather than missing persons 24 hours later

We say I-3 Condition 3 even though I-2 lists Mental Hospital (it also lists child care). the trick here is if they are curred to a condition of normalcy they would most likey be on trial for a capital crime.
 
Sounds like could be either

Are they given medication??? Sounds a little more I-2

Conviction or not should not matter.

More then likely they are there under court order
 
Last edited by a moderator:
To me if they are "under restraint and security" or locked down in their smoke compartment, it is I-3, if they can freely leave the smoke compartment without someone else operating the door or unlocking the door they are I-2.

Whether or not they are locked down seems to be the key to me after reviewing the 2006 IBC.
 
People in jail awaiting trial are not yet "convicted" and jails are I-3. There are provisions in the IBC for Group I-2 for locked psychatric wards where staff has the keys for egress. It could go either way. Have the DOR review the differences and propose a code conforming path.
 
my consideration of the I-3 is not based on who did what?, or who knows what? but more on the security and process required to exit the sleeping units. who has the key and how far can the resident go on their own. secured againt exit witout assistance guilty or innocent.

to mee if you won't send them to the grocery store unescorted un shackled the you are a restrained individual.

like the way tex says it

have an upcomming meeting with architects, and director who insists because the court has'nt convicted any one it hospital

to me a hospital with locked exits and rooms is a hospital prison and thats where we are planting the shovel
 
If the residents are incapable of self egress due to the locks only, it could be an I-3. If they are incapable due to both locks and medical conditions, it would be an I-2.
 
$ $ $ $

Architect1281,

What's the "more restrictive" application [ refer to Section 102.1 in the IBC ]?

$ $ $ $
 
Are they court ordered to be there

Is it more of a mental institution then jail?? More then likely yes

As in state mental hospital
 
North Star

yes they there by order of a judge.

the administrators prefer the feel goodness of the I-2 We are here to help hospital aspect and are want to ignore the facts by saying because there is committal witout conviction it is not a nasty prison.

Its' just that the locks and restricted movement and egress place it firmly in I-3 Condition 3 at a minimum (my assesment)

In my professional Designer practice I always went by the axiom

" Never ask a Building (or any other) Official what they want, Its like asking the used car salesman what they want for the car"

Now the shorts are on the other Butt

and I just plain don't believe the applicants assesment.

Strange because we both get our paychecks from the same office. Govt. Payroll

State Hospital for the committed a crime but may be insane (harsh I know)

State Building Commission (me / us ) to apply code.

I wasn't kidding about if a patient walks away you call the National Guard, or at least All the Police departmrents local and state

My opinion is that the code does not care as much about conviction or committal but inability by security measures to egress.

many of the "patients" are fully capable of physical mobility (generally violent thats why they are there) and the truth is because of that they have to be restricted.

the patients sanity is in question because the this they have done are just not associated with sanity
 
You may want to look at it from the standpoint of what level of restricted egress is permitted for each of the two cases. This is not my area of expertise, but I believe under I-2, there is no legal method of locking egress doors in the egress path other than delayed egress. I would think Hannibal Lecter would soon figure out all it takes is pulling the fire alarm to escape, or fight off the orderlies for the 15 seconds it takes the delayed egress hardware to release.
 
# # # #

Architect1281,

Sounds like a very tough situation that you are in.

IMO, I would not ignore "the facts" [ as you say ] and try to

stick to the codes aspect. I-3, Condition 3 at the minimum! If someone

higher than your paygrade wants to lessen that, that's their option.

Apply what you know is code.

FWIW, ...ask RJJ about making tough choices. Recently he had to

make some decisions that lead to a removal of some mentally

challenged individuals who were at risk in their environment.

As you; and a lot of others on this forum, already know, being

associated with interpretation of the codes has its rewards, as well

as, its gut wrenching, tear your heart out lows! I sincerely

believe that each one of us is where we are by design and not by

accident. We each have a "codes ministry" if you will.

# # # #
 
I guess I would have to change to I-3 since they will be locked down

and cannot see where you can lock down an I-2, even though in some instances you would

maybe I-3 examples needs to be added to include mental and drug lock down units
 
IF the people do not have freedom of movement to the public way, then it would be an I-3. Most memory care units are uusally accessory to an I-2. Since this is a stand alone, I would classify it as I-3 with condition 2 or condition 3. This classification is dependent upon the ability of the patients/clients ability to move thru smoke compartments.
 
The explination and intended use of the facilily based on what has been described, is clearly a detention and therefore meets the I-3 and associated locking conditions.... since I don't have any valid information on the smoke compartment and occupant load of the compartment etc.; the opinion on conditional locking arrangements (remote, delayed, keys, multiple keys, how any locks, travel etc.) can't be addressed by me anyway.......just my humble opinion as requested.

BTW also consistant with 101
 
Thank you all

DR J (Sellers) Love the Avatar BTW.

I-2 can be as benign as Child care so I'm way right of that

North Star

We are having a Seance with the tenants administration and design team come tuesday

The Commish and I are planting our feet firmly in the cement that is yet to be poured. I-3s Con 3

Thats as High as the paygrade gets is one up from here.

Our respondibility like RJJ is to the people that populate and operate any facility they are the reason we

interperate and enforce the code.

CDA and Builder Bob (are you related to Electrical Bob?)

Concurrence is sincere

And FMBill yes RI is the place where if the Building inspector don't get ya

The fire marshal will. We hva dueling codes ICC and NFPA 1 n, 101 (heavily ammended of course)
 
RI is the place where if the Building inspector don't get yaThe fire marshal will. We hva dueling codes ICC and NFPA 1 n, 101 (heavily ammended of course)
Click to expand...
Of course, my opinion is that is not such a bad thing if the officials can see the forest through the trees and realize that some instances need more diversification to getting the proper interpretation to address the situation at hand.
 
FMBill

Having Practiced (till I got it right) Architecture for 25 pluss years before converting to enforcement

I actually had to understand and implement both codes (starnge but not that difficult) all you had to do

was design with the Books OPEN!

If one is more specific than the other you do both.

I have an amazingly great relationship with the Marshals Offices - to me its natural and not the obstacale that some

try to make it.

I have shelves full of both BOCA, International and NFPA codes in the office right above the computer monitor

they are always open. On this one the NFPA say it Aint a Day Care - if they are Locked it's an Institution.

the marshal is going to be at the meeting with me. so all should go fairly well - even if that seems moderatly dillusional.
 
I have worked on a few that were both I-2 and I-3 for mental health. I agree with previous comments that if the residents are court ordered to stay, that places the burden on the institution to ensure they stay within a specific area it is an I-3. If you have an I-2 with an officer posted that is different. Worst case I had was a I-3 for children ages 10 and younger. That is criminally insane kids.

I have also worked on senior care home with an alzheimer unit. That had egress controls to limit the patients ability to exit. Worst Christmas Eve was when they alzheimer unit had a small fire in a bedroom/bathroom at 11:30 at night. The staff was escorting patients to the cafeteria and they kept wandering back to their bedrooms. As I walked into the facility to assess the situation there were patients many without clothes wandering the hallways. They were scared, lost and without their diapers. It was horrible.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top