You can't chain the doors shut! ... Right?

[lpiburn]

I think I've entered a state of "cognitive dissonance". Old school building, technically "B" occupancy because it is above 12th grade. The building has a ton of problems and should probably be condemned (it is over 50 years old, wood framed and way over area, etc.) but I am getting questions on one item specifically. Here are some pictures of the outside doors. This is typical for EVERY SINGLE exit door in the building.

View attachment 1959

View attachment 1960

I am doing a review on the building but I am not the AHJ. I commented that all doors violate egress because of "improvised locking devices". The response was "these are only locked after hours". At first I was incredulous. Of course you can't do that, I thought. But then I took a closer look and I think they may have a loophole. Since this is a "B" occupancy, panic hardware is not required. IBC 1008.1.9.3.1 In buildings in occupancy Group A having an occupant load of 300 or less, Groups B, F, M and S, and in places of religious worship, the main exterior door or doors are permitted to be equipped with key-operated locking devices from the egress side provided: 2.1. The locking device is readily distinguishable as locked;2.2. A readily visible durable sign is posted on the egress side on or adjacent to the door stating: THIS DOOR TO REMAIN UNLOCKED WHEN BUILDING IS OCCUPIED. [...]; and2.3. The use of the key-operated locking device is revokable by the building official for due cause.It sounds stupid in my head, but doesn't a padlock like the one in the photos satisfy the requirements? If so, 1. Could they be in compliance just by adding signage?2. Does this just hinge on the graspability requirements for door hardware? (that seems like pretty flimsy reasoning compared to the dangers of lockable egress doors)3. Would this fall under the provision of 1008.13.9.4 for bolt locks? (there are still some exceptions here they might be able to use such as the under 50 persons exception)By the way, those black things on the photos are there so the staff can shove a bent steel bar across the opening, just to make extra sure the door doesn't get opened. I'm pretty confident THAT is a blatant violation, but the padlock has me wondering.Thanks in advance for any advice on this one.-LPView attachment 1959

View attachment 1960

/monthly_2013_10/SANY0418_resize.jpg.87b2693d63b2ca9a25d1892b93a331f8.jpg

/monthly_2013_10/SANY0468_resize.jpg.0a1a072716f4cffb37f7fba1e61f8e92.jpg

 

[steveray]

Are those the "main doors"? And if you are going to buy that, make sure "after hours" is strictly defined....After school hours? After the basketball game? or dance?........Oh...and by the way...get rid of that fire extinguisher cabinet!....1003.3.3 Horizontal projections.

Structural elements, fixtures or furnishings shall not project horizontally from either side more than 4 inches (102 mm) over any walking surface between the heights of 27 inches (686 mm) and 80 inches (2032 mm) above the walking surface.

That'll make you real popular!.....

 

[lpiburn]

Are those the "main doors"?

Not the main entry, but the main exits. To make a long story short, imagine an "H" shaped building, with the entrance in the middle and the exits at the tips of each wing.

Oh...and by the way...get rid of that fire extinguisher cabinet!....1003.3.3 Horizontal projections.

Believe me, that is the least of their worries. I am recommending that the entire building be abandoned. Honestly this is more of an academic question for my own knowledge.

 

[Mac]

They aren't identified as exits - isn't that part of the definition?

 

[lpiburn]

Lack of exit signage does not make it "not an exit". Besides, in this case the doors are at the end of long hallways and are clearly the exits. Now that you mention it, the code section I referenced specifically says the "main entry door", not exit doors. Does that mean that this exception doesn't even apply to any doors other than the main exit? I wasn't reading it that way before.

 

[cda]

We allow securing doors after a place is closed

 

[ndaniels]

You can as long as the signage is right... not the most ideal situation so if the building official decides that he has due cause to revoke it

 

[LGreene]

In my opinion, this does not meet the intent of that section of the code, since the code limits the use to the main entrance(s). Here is the Commentary:

Exception 2 permits a locking device, such as a double-cylinder dead bolt, on the main entrance door. It must be immediately apparent that these doors are locked. For example, such locking devices may have an integral indicator that automatically reflects the “locked” or “unlocked” status of the device. In addition, a sign must be provided that clearly states that the door is to be unlocked when the building is occupied. The sign on the door not only reminds employees to unlock the door, but also advises the public that an unacceptable arrangement exists if one finds the door locked. Ideally, the individual who encounters the locked door will notify management and possibly the building official. Note that the use of the key-locking device is revocable by the building official. The locking arrangement is not permitted on any door other than the main exit and, therefore, the employees, security and cleaning crews will have access to other exits without requiring the use of a key. This allowance is not limited just to multiple-exit buildings but also to small buildings with one exit. This option is an alternative to the panic hardware required by Section 1008.1.10.

I have only seen this allowed on the main entrance doors, and even that is pretty rare on new buildings. We've talked before on this forum about what would be allowed after hours, and we could not reach a consensus. Some require unobstructed egress at all times, some allow a device which can be removed from the inside but without a key or tool, and some might allow the chains and padlocks but I think that's a slippery slope. Once this type of situation is permitted, those responsible for the building often seem to forget when it's ok to lock the doors. I'm not an AHJ but I don't think it should be allowed. I just posted a story Friday about a school that had locked surface bolts on all of the doors except the main entrance, during school hours. I Dig Hardware / I Hate Hardware » School Locks Doors from the Inside

 

[lpiburn]

Thanks everyone for your input. I have a couple of followup questions on the same topic. Here are some photos of security grilles at the same project.

View attachment 905

The first one is at the end of a long hallway separating admin spaces from a connected gymnasium. (No, they don't have adequate fire separation. Different issue...) The intent here is to prevent access to the rest of the school during after hours events, which relates to steveray's comment above. My first thought was that if this was locked during school hours, it would create a very long dead-end corridor, which would be an obvious violation. From the gym side, however, egress is still maintained just fine with other adjacent exits. Remember that this is over 12th grade, so we are a B occupancy. Would you pass this?View attachment 906

The second photo is of a very small admin building which is not connected to the main building. It looks residential but it's an office. Here they added steel bars to the entry/exit doors, one on each side of the building. These are also secured after hours with a padlock. Any issues with this installation?View attachment 905

View attachment 906

/monthly_2013_10/SANY0264_resize.jpg.24d4d3e03acfbe37d04abbe8b20825a8.jpg

/monthly_2013_10/DSC01435_resize.jpg.7895e6f86c11f9a99e6eba19aea377af.jpg

 

[cda]

Admin building I have no problem with

I hate the gates

If exiting is assessed and no travel distance problem, may consider it. Have seen set up at malls and other places. Once again I do not like them for various reasons

 

[BSSTG]

Likeness does not mater cda...!Gates are our major need and we have to adjust with them. I agree we have some other options also like doors and much more but all other options do not useful as the gates..

Greetings,

I don't like them either and as I am the AHJ, we've got a problem with locked egress doors. If it's not a required exit and not marked as such, then probably a nonissue.

wikipedia quote

The Hamlet chicken processing plant fire was an industrial fire in Hamlet, North Carolina, at the Imperial Foods processing plant on September 3, 1991, resulting from a failure in a hydraulic line. Twenty-five were killed and 55 injured in the fire, trapped behind locked fire doors. In 11 years of operation, the plant had never received a safety inspection.[1] Investigators believe a safety inspection might have prevented the disaster.[2]

Imagine that. I used to work in a food processing plant and at one point they were locking the back exit from the production area. I and a fellow employee through a fit and the chains were removed. We were not so much concerned about fire, but ammonia leaks as there were NH3 lines all throught the plant for refrigeration.

BSSTG

 

[steveray]

1008.2 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.

 

[lpiburn]

Gates used as a component in a means of egress...

Ah, but you see that's my question. During the day, the gate is left open, so it is NOT a component in the means of egress. After hours it is locked, but from the Gym side it is still not a component of the means of egress. Then it falls back on the whole "if they can lock it they will" argument like in the story BSSTG posted. So would the gate be OK as long as it is not locked during the daytime?

 

[Builder Bob]

In a quick response, no either are compliant..... the gate in the "school" is going to create a dead end corridor of over 20 feet when closed. Even thought a exit sign is visible further back down the hall, I would question the quick and rapid use of the exit in an emergency, whether man made or natural...

Also, the scope of the code should protect emergency responders, if the gate is closed and a fire fighter needs to bail out - they can't as they are trapped...

no different than bars placed over bed room windows...

Fire Kills 4 Children Trapped by Bars - Los Angeles Times

 

[cda]

I would say case by case

can you justify it in the code

and can you sleep at night

 

[cda]

Ok how about ask the question

If a solid wall was there would you still have code complying exiting in the rest of the building

 

[Mech]

What if the gates on the administration building are padlocked by pranksters while people are still inside? Perhaps a lock integral to the gate would be better than a padlock.