In Mark Kuhn’s next post, he writes about one of his specification projects where he needs to balance containment for lions(!) with the egress requirements of the model codes. I wrote hardware specifications for many years, and while I don’t miss the late nights, the uncommunicated changes, or the times when I was asked to write a spec without a door schedule or door numbers, I do miss working on interesting situations like this one. 😀
P.S. I took the lion photo on my trip to Tanzania!
P.P.S If you need help with a hardware specification, click here!
~~~
It’s never a dull moment as an Allegion specwriter!
I just wrapped up a meeting with an architect and a zookeeper. Yes, you heard correctly, a zookeeper. It gets better…the project is a lion enclosure!!!
This project only has 3 doors, so I was thinking, How complicated could this be?…the answer is – VERY!
In our meeting, every time the zookeeper explained how he wanted a door to function, it was in conflict with that the codes require…I almost felt like I was being punked! LOL
This is not my first project dealing with animals and egress. I’ve written a few specs for dog bars…BTW, this is not where dogs go to unwind after a hard day of work. This is where people go and take their furry companions along with them. In the case of the dog bars, I can usually convince the owner that if I put both a lever and a closer on a door this typically prevents the dogs from eloping. Because even if a dog may be able to work a lever, they have a hard time operating a lever while pushing or pulling against the force of a door closer. This argument usually works, but the zookeeper wasn’t buying it.
In the lion enclosure, there are 3 swinging man doors entering the space (2 pairs and 1 single). Inside this enclosure there are 6 separate “dens” – each den has its own lion door leading outside to the habitat area. The den area is separated from the human area with gates (a main gate to enter the den area and each den has its own gate). However, there are times when they bring lions through the man doors (typically crated).
The purpose of each door is as follows:
- Door 101A: Human traffic and the occasional crated lion transport
- Door 101B: Human traffic only
- Door 102: To close off the habitat area so the humans can clean (ether locking the lions out or locking the lions in)
The zookeeper wants the following:
- Doorknobs not levers – but the accessibility standards require hardware to operate with no tight grasping, pinching, or twisting of the wrist
- Locks that are always locked both inside and out – but the model codes require doors to allow egress without key or special knowledge or effort
- Additional surface bolts – but the model codes require doors to unlatch with one releasing motion (he even mentioned a barricade for Door 102 in case the lions try to break it down)
In our meeting, they referenced NFPA 150, Fire and Life Safety in Animal Housing Facilities. I was able to read the entire means of egress section (Chapter 8) of the standard (it’s pretty short), but I don’t see anything allowing these types of exceptions.
So I’m wondering if anyone in our very knowledgeable iDigHardware audience knows if there are special exceptions to the egress codes for lion enclosures? Or maybe some AHJs want to weigh in with what they would allow/require?
WWYD?
You need to login or register to bookmark/favorite this content.
My thought is this is not in the scope of IBC.
I have never done a zoo. There are zoo standards, and I am thinking would defer to them and stay out of IBC
One agency: https://www.aza.org/accreditation/
Charles,
I agree thanks for the input.
-Mark
No matter what the keeper or architect want, sooner or later all of this must be reviewed and approved by the AHJ. Better to get the AHJ involved early on and see what agreements/understandings/compromises might be available is usually going to work out better than waiting where clients can get inflexible in their thinking.
Larry,
You are absolutely correct!
-Mark
Why not handle it like a confinement facility. If I have a manned post to override and let folks out I meet the standard. It is from a practical standpoint a confinement facility for animals not people. Also, like some confinement facilities you have to provide a key override as well.. You could then have a locked lever. Perhaps one that brakes away since a 800 lb pound cat trying to activate it something is gonna give.
I agree we could handle it like an I occupancy and there’s no doubt that adding some electronic hardware and access control into the equation would be a great option too. But like you said the code addresses confining humans not animals and is very specific as to when you can use such measures to confine humans. Unfortunately, this place doesn’t meet those criteria, so we would still need AHJ approval to implement any sort of confinement options.
-Mark