In a past Decoded article I wrote about “doors provided for egress purposes.” Typically, doors that are provided for egress must be compliant with the International Building Code (IBC) and the International Fire Code (IFC), even if the quantity of doors provided exceeds the number of exits required.
So if you have a door that looks a lot like an egress door, but for whatever reason you don’t want it to be code-compliant, how do you prove that the door is not provided for egress purposes? I’m guessing that the signage on the doors in today’s Fixed-it Friday photo was required by the code official, to help set the expectation with building occupants that these doors are not provided for egress purposes and the vestibule may not allow unrestricted egress.
What do you think?
You need to login or register to bookmark/favorite this content.
Nope
Security checkpoint, to enter the building, and they do not want people using those doors.
Government building, do as I say,,, Not as I do.
So my answer, is if it looks like an exit, it shall be an exit. But, if more doors are provided than required, and I would say not near other exit doors, no exit sign/ or remove it, and mark it as Not an exit.
Not code but seen too many places where if there was a door, there was an exit sign. No exit analysis done.
Charles,
Not sure I agree with the government exception. This is from PB-100 (GSA building how to, if you will)
1.3.1 PUBLIC BUILDINGS AMENDMENTS OF 1988
The Public Buildings Amendments of 1988, 40 U.S.C. 3312, require that each building constructed or
altered by GSA or any other federal agency must, to the maximum extent feasible, comply with one of
the nationally recognized model building codes and with other applicable nationally recognized codes.
These projects must consider local zoning laws and other local requirements. It also provides for state
and local government consultation, review, and inspection and requires the agency to give due
consideration to state and local government recommendations.
Also I think this is only for government owned buildings on Federal land. not leased space out in the world.
Then you also have to look at your contract. Most require following the code with exceptions in writing. This is also the same for foreign embassies in the US. There is a public law that explains this element.
I confess I used to think the above could do what they want but no. I think the feds have adopted NFPA 101 as the life safety code. The DOD has. Thats another kettle of fish….Just who is the AHJ for DOD. See UFC 3-600-1 for that answer. Not what you would think.
I understand
Have had to deal with various levels of ahj’s., as an ahj.
Some will work with you and some you just do not get any movement.
Plus it depends on where the building sets. Say feds, if on fed land, I can recommend, code compliant, I did not have the power to enforce it.
Yes different government agencies are supposed to follow the rules. And, normally they have their own enforcers.
The doors also have kick-down hold opens installed. I would suggest “EMERGENCY EXIT ONLY” signage.
If you look closely at the top of the picture there is a green “glow” probably from an exit sign. If this is NOT a required exit and they don’t want to use it as one, as a code official, I would have the sign removed.
You’re right, Ed! I see the green glow now!
– Lori
I don’t hate it. In my view the signage is advisory and meant to steer routine traffic, but if the doors are functional, they will work in case of emergency. I guess that one issue may be that we don’t know why it’s not an exit? If this is because the actual MOE is blocked further beyond those doors, ignoring the signs could be to one peril, but if its merely routine operational convenience, then the availability of another exit has not be removed. All this assumes that this is no longer or was never part of the required means of egress.
I was walking a project one day with the AHJ, and I asked him what doors he considers a fire exit. He answered flatly and seriously….”every door”.
I agree, Jim! With limited exceptions.
– Lori
Sign could be better as “exit in case of
Emergency only”
I would have signage that reads emergency exit only since these doors are technically exit doors. They also need to remove then non-ADA compliant kick downs and change the closer arms to hold opens if they want to be able to prop the doors open.
The green glow from the EXIT sign above the storefront to signals they are egress doors. It they are not meant nor required for egress, then that has to come down, with AHJ approval. I don’t like the contradiction of signage.