I am working with a client that would prefer not having panic hardware on a gate and I researched so much I got to a point where I am truly trying to find out how the code can or should be interpreted. I am wondering or rather hoping some of you can provide some code based input.
Here is the scenario:
The building is a small clubhouse with about 30 occupants at the gathering room and 40 occupants at the covered area by the pool. The pool has a deck and not included in the 40 occupant count.
The pool and pool deck have an occupant load of 196. The building is small enough and has a main use of servicing the pool and or in a way being an accessory of it (not using the word accessory in any way relevant to exceptions because of use based on percentage of size) in which the GATE to access the building open foyer is the same Gate that gives you access to the open pool deck. (your typical set up at a small community clubhouse in FL)
FBC, or IBC for that matter, indicates that at more than 50 occupants I need panic hardware, BUT 1010.1.9.3 allows the use of a locking device if I have less than 300. (assuming that it is always unlocked, as the wording on FBC doesn't strictly say "provided ALL of the below" like NFPA does.
So, lets say I have 266 occupants. I am required to have 2 exits, they are each 36", so I am good on size. The capacity for each door is 133 occupants, which per FBC/IBC, being under 300 allows me to NOT use panic hardware.
However, NFPA says that I need to have panic hardware if I have more than 100 occupants. (12.2.2.2.3)
Here is the question:
I only have two exits, does it mean that if I had three exits I could assume that my load would be 89 per door and I would then be under 100? Or should I purely look at the total load of the area and determine that even though each door has a 89 person capacity, I need to have panic hardware on all of them?
I hope that is not too confusing. Would appreciate any feedback. Thank you!
Regardless of the code, why is the client against panic hardware??
Apr 24, 20 10:34 am ·
·
Non Sequitur
costs money?
Apr 24, 20 10:42 am ·
·
RckPprScrs
Mainly driven by how it looks. They don't want the mesh or plate/barrier that would have to be installed to keep unauthorized users from getting access by pressing the panic bar from outside.(through the gate)
Is the space considered Assembly? Anything over 75 is technically an assembly space and needs panic hardware.
Apr 24, 20 11:01 am ·
·
RckPprScrs
It is an assembly, but in this case FBC allows assembly occupancies to not have a panic bar under 300 occupants if certain things are met FBC
1010.1.9.3
Yep, panic hardware. The other is security; you'll need to be able to keep people from being able to reach through and operate.
Next fun one... you are going to struggle to find a exterior rated crash bar. Makes sense if you think about it; commercial doors exit out, so normally they would always be on the warm side of the building shell. More fun, is they'll probably want keycard/fob access versus key. I also didn't find a exterior rated magnetic strike. Best solution we came up with at the time was entry to the pool area was through the clubhouse. Panic devices were emergency use only through the fence enclosure and spec everything to stainless steel internals.
Thanks everyone for responding. I am pretty sure we need it now, it truly just makes sense. There is no point in trying to cheat the code when ultimately it will be a life safety feature.
The sad thing is that the GC and client were pushing us because other architects have done larger clubhouses and pools without the panic hardware...
Panic Hardware Required?
I am working with a client that would prefer not having panic hardware on a gate and I researched so much I got to a point where I am truly trying to find out how the code can or should be interpreted. I am wondering or rather hoping some of you can provide some code based input.
Here is the scenario:
The building is a small clubhouse with about 30 occupants at the gathering room and 40 occupants at the covered area by the pool. The pool has a deck and not included in the 40 occupant count.
The pool and pool deck have an occupant load of 196. The building is small enough and has a main use of servicing the pool and or in a way being an accessory of it (not using the word accessory in any way relevant to exceptions because of use based on percentage of size) in which the GATE to access the building open foyer is the same Gate that gives you access to the open pool deck. (your typical set up at a small community clubhouse in FL)
FBC, or IBC for that matter, indicates that at more than 50 occupants I need panic hardware, BUT 1010.1.9.3 allows the use of a locking device if I have less than 300. (assuming that it is always unlocked, as the wording on FBC doesn't strictly say "provided ALL of the below" like NFPA does.
So, lets say I have 266 occupants. I am required to have 2 exits, they are each 36", so I am good on size. The capacity for each door is 133 occupants, which per FBC/IBC, being under 300 allows me to NOT use panic hardware.
However, NFPA says that I need to have panic hardware if I have more than 100 occupants. (12.2.2.2.3)
Here is the question:
I only have two exits, does it mean that if I had three exits I could assume that my load would be 89 per door and I would then be under 100? Or should I purely look at the total load of the area and determine that even though each door has a 89 person capacity, I need to have panic hardware on all of them?
I hope that is not too confusing. Would appreciate any feedback. Thank you!
Ask your local code official for their interpretation.
Generally speaking you need to go by the most restrictive requirements of the the codes you're using unless the code official says otherwise.
Short answer - If the IBC says you don't need panic hardware but the NFPA says you do then you need panic hardware.
Regardless of the code, why is the client against panic hardware??
costs money?
Mainly driven by how it looks. They don't want the mesh or plate/barrier that would have to be installed to keep unauthorized users from getting access by pressing the panic bar from outside.(through the gate)
Is the space considered Assembly? Anything over 75 is technically an assembly space and needs panic hardware.
It is an assembly, but in this case FBC allows assembly occupancies to not have a panic bar under 300 occupants if certain things are met FBC 1010.1.9.3
I read this as you need panic hardware.
locking device is not incompatible with panic hardware, with "push to exit" or door release mechanisms.
Yep, panic hardware. The other is security; you'll need to be able to keep people from being able to reach through and operate.
Next fun one... you are going to struggle to find a exterior rated crash bar. Makes sense if you think about it; commercial doors exit out, so normally they would always be on the warm side of the building shell. More fun, is they'll probably want keycard/fob access versus key. I also didn't find a exterior rated magnetic strike. Best solution we came up with at the time was entry to the pool area was through the clubhouse. Panic devices were emergency use only through the fence enclosure and spec everything to stainless steel internals.
Thank you!
Thanks everyone for responding. I am pretty sure we need it now, it truly just makes sense. There is no point in trying to cheat the code when ultimately it will be a life safety feature.
The sad thing is that the GC and client were pushing us because other architects have done larger clubhouses and pools without the panic hardware...
Thanks!
Panic hardware? Make sure that the rope is short and that the beam is high.
What is the local jurisdiction? 75 is pretty typical for panic hardware tipping point.
They can always remove it later if later, but thats thier problem at that point.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.