I received this partial plan from Kankshini Kiran Gondhali of Allegion, along with a really good question. The school has asked for the door between two single toilets (707.2) to be locked/lockable from both sides.
Would an institutional function lockset (always locked on both sides) be permitted on a door between two single restrooms?
Here are my thoughts:
An institutional function lockset has key cylinders on both levers, and a key is required to unlock the door from either side. In almost all locations, the model codes require doors in a means of egress to be able to be opened from the egress side without a key, tool, special knowledge or effort. This requirement applies to doors that are required for egress and also to doors that are provided for egress purposes.
So…is door 707.2 required for egress? Considering the low occupant load and the presence of another door in each restroom, the answer is no.
Is the door provided for egress purposes? In my opinion, the answer to this would also be no. Maybe it provides access for the school nurse? I’m not positive. (If you know, leave a comment!)
The final decision will be up to the authority having jurisdiction (AHJ), but this seems like one of the rare situations where an institutional function lockset could be used.
What do you think?
WWYD?
You need to login or register to bookmark/favorite this content.
Hi Lori,
Would you suggest adding an indicator on this opening as well to ensure people know its locked/occupied or leave it alone?
Thanks,
Hi Kurt –
I guess it depends on the purpose of the door and the needs of the school. Some signage might be helpful so people know they have privacy. Until someone with a key comes along!
– Lori
People will typically leave the way they came in so I have no problem with this. Most people would assume it’s a Janitor’s closet on the other side anyway. And if you are concerned for the visually impaired, knurl the levers.
It is definitely not required for egress…. perhaps for gender-neutral uses?
If connecting hotel rooms are (commonly) allowed with 2-sided locksets, I don’t see why 2 single-user toilet rooms cannot…
A. We can’t make egress assumptions from a part plan, especially this one cutting off 706
B. The markups obscure a lot. 111 and 707 are toilet rooms. It’s hard to be sure on 115.
C. After considering the rooms and the floor layout, if you still don’t have an answer it’s OK to ask the architect “Why is there a door here?”
Appears possibly there’s supply storage in 707 and a mop sink in 115? So maybe just for janitorial service access. Obviously not an egress issue as noted.
Thanks Adam!
– Lori
The configuration is intentional and is reasonably sound from a security perspective. It allows the nurse to access either restroom quickly without permitting users of one restroom to pass into the other. In effect, it maintains separation between the nurse’s area and the corridor restroom while still giving the nurse direct access to both spaces without having to circulate through the corridor. It also prevents an occupant of the nurse’s restroom from exiting into the corridor restroom, which could create both supervision and security concerns. At the same time, the arrangement preserves a sense of privacy for the corridor restroom user. The plan is somewhat unclear in its presentation, but the functional objective is evident. Both rooms are likely intended to be unisex
Thanks for sharing your insight, Jim!
– Lori