Practice Management Member Conversations

This message has been cross posted to the following Discussion Forums: Retail and Entertainment and Practice Management Member Conversations .
-------------------------------------------
Does anyone have any specific recommendations for preventing vehicular obstructions at required means of egress?  For example, in large retail centers, many times the rear or sides of buildings have egress doors which exit directly onto pavement (no curb, no elevated stoop).  There is nothing (short of common sense) to prevent a vehicle from parking alongside the exit door thereby preventing occupants from using that door as a means of egress.  Our firm typically provides bollards for this scenario on new construction, but there is nothing specific in the code (that I can find) which REQUIRES anything.  Convincing an owner of an existing facility to put bollards in at a door that's been that way for 30 years is difficult. We've recommended adding signage to the exterior side of the door which states "No parking at any time" but some clients even object to that and deem it unnecessary.

Any suggestions or insight would be appreciated - both from a design standpoint and from a risk management standpoint (the architect's liability for NOT providing bollards, signage, etc.).

-------------------------------------------
Daryl Bray AIA
SGA Design Group, P.C.
Tulsa OK
-------------------------------------------

I typically place a landscape or concrete island in front of the door.

-------------------------------------------
Robert Collins AIA
VP Real Estate Services
Wise Way Foods
Merrillville IN
-------------------------------------------






Original Message:
Sent: 03-17-2014 16:52
From: Daryl Bray
Subject: Maintaining Unobstructed means of Egress from the Exterior

This message has been cross posted to the following Discussion Forums: Retail and Entertainment and Practice Management Member Conversations .
-------------------------------------------
Does anyone have any specific recommendations for preventing vehicular obstructions at required means of egress?  For example, in large retail centers, many times the rear or sides of buildings have egress doors which exit directly onto pavement (no curb, no elevated stoop).  There is nothing (short of common sense) to prevent a vehicle from parking alongside the exit door thereby preventing occupants from using that door as a means of egress.  Our firm typically provides bollards for this scenario on new construction, but there is nothing specific in the code (that I can find) which REQUIRES anything.  Convincing an owner of an existing facility to put bollards in at a door that's been that way for 30 years is difficult. We've recommended adding signage to the exterior side of the door which states "No parking at any time" but some clients even object to that and deem it unnecessary.

Any suggestions or insight would be appreciated - both from a design standpoint and from a risk management standpoint (the architect's liability for NOT providing bollards, signage, etc.).

-------------------------------------------
Daryl Bray AIA
SGA Design Group, P.C.
Tulsa OK
-------------------------------------------

I am sometimes surprised by queries that have answers I assumed would be apparent to anyone trained or licensed in the architectural field.

As other posters have observed, in any state that has adopted any one of the last many versions of the standard building codes, a clear unobstructed path of travel is required to the public way - which does not 'stop' at the threshold of the door in the building's exterior wall.  That is the minimum legal requirement.  (NOTE there are actually a small number of states that have no adopted code, so they are excepted from that comment.)

To achieve the clear path requirement, it seems obvious something has to be done to ensure parked vehicles do not block the exit.  Although it could be argued that this is an "Owner maintenance" issue, experience teaches us that is not a supportable argument. 

Blockage of the exit door is an event that can be anticipated (is 'predictable').  What that means is that the Architect (who is presumed to have knowledge superior to that of a layperson) is obligated to ensure the building design protects against injury or death that is preventable (because it can be predicted).  Because codes do not always clearly address an issue, it is critical to understand the Architect's primary duty to look beyond the code's 'minimum' compliance language (as a general principle). 

Architects are charged with more than just meeting code minimums.  They have an underlying obligation to design buildings such that they protect the public health and safety.  That is a part of the professional Standard of Care.   The AIA ethical guidelines (as well as those of every major professional design organization) emphasize that the licensed professional's obligation to protect the public is elevated even above the duty to serve the Client. 

Ensuring that occupants (in this example) have a way to get out of the building and 'away from it' in an emergency situation is a fundamental consideration... and therefore part of the Standard of Care.  In this example, the building code already makes clear that the pathway has to remain unobstructed, so there is clear guidance.  However, there are other situations that arise in which designers intuitively or by experience understand that providing a safe/healthy building requires something greater than the 'minimum' required by codes.  That is when you need to go 'above and beyond' code minimums in discharging your professional duties.

The absence of explicit building code language (for any given situation) does not provide the designer with a justification to look the other way... ever.   When a client says (as in this particular case) they don't want a railing, bollard, curbed island, etc., that is not an excuse to eliminate prudent protection measures from your design (i.e. to ensure the exit is not blocked). 

Saving space and/or money may be the Owner's concern, but the Standard of Care demands the designer stand up and be counted.   Do not let your client's perspective cloud your professional judgment.  Tell your client that it is your decision that a physical device is required.  Do not sign/seal a design that does not, in your opinion, meet with your underlying obligation for protection of building occupants.  Nobody can force you to issue a design that fails to meet the Standard of Care. 

And to those who think they can blame later consequences on an Owner's decision (demand) to overlook a safety issue...  be aware that no document the Owner says it will sign, waiving your concerns, will legally protect you from a negligence claim. 

It is you, the Architect - not the Owner - that is responsible for a 'safe' design.  It is you, the Architect - not the Owner - that will be held responsible if occupants end up being injured or killed because the exit door was blocked (AND IF your design, which should have anticipated this possibility, was negligent).   

Architects want to be held in high esteem.  Part of earning praise is standing up for what is 'right'.  Be the 'leader' you want others to think you are.  When the Standard of Care begs for something that is not explicitly dictated by building code language, you need to firmly (and politely) explain to your client that you are the one in charge (and the one that has responsibility for your safe design).  If your client is unwilling to allow you to exercise your professional duties property, let him/her pay you for what you have done to date and shop around for  someone else that is willing to bend to his/her will (and assume the risk). 

-------------------------------------------
Howard Littman AIA
Forensic Architect, Expert Witness
Howard I. Littman, AIA
Agoura Hills CA
-------------------------------------------

I should also have acknowledged that with regard to this specific example, there is another obvious reason physical protection is needed.  The door in question is presumed in the exterior wall, and opens onto a vehicle pathway.  Since it is an egress door it opens outward.  Doors of this type are often not 'secured' against casual use and are used by employees and invitees on a regular basis...  so it is necessary to think about what might happen both in an emergence situation and 'normal use' conditions.  There is a predictable hazard of someone opening the door into a moving vehicle's path... possibly damaging the door and vehicle, and/or injuring the pedestrian.  The physical protection is needed in order to mitigate the risk of this foreseeable hazard.           

-------------------------------------------
Howard Littman AIA
Forensic Architect, Expert Witness
Howard I. Littman, AIA
Agoura Hills CA
-------------------------------------------






Original Message:
Sent: 03-19-2014 20:22
From: Howard Littman
Subject: Maintaining Unobstructed means of Egress from the Exterior

I am sometimes surprised by queries that have answers I assumed would be apparent to anyone trained or licensed in the architectural field.

As other posters have observed, in any state that has adopted any one of the last many versions of the standard building codes, a clear unobstructed path of travel is required to the public way - which does not 'stop' at the threshold of the door in the building's exterior wall.  That is the minimum legal requirement.  (NOTE there are actually a small number of states that have no adopted code, so they are excepted from that comment.)

To achieve the clear path requirement, it seems obvious something has to be done to ensure parked vehicles do not block the exit.  Although it could be argued that this is an "Owner maintenance" issue, experience teaches us that is not a supportable argument. 

Blockage of the exit door is an event that can be anticipated (is 'predictable').  What that means is that the Architect (who is presumed to have knowledge superior to that of a layperson) is obligated to ensure the building design protects against injury or death that is preventable (because it can be predicted).  Because codes do not always clearly address an issue, it is critical to understand the Architect's primary duty to look beyond the code's 'minimum' compliance language (as a general principle). 

Architects are charged with more than just meeting code minimums.  They have an underlying obligation to design buildings such that they protect the public health and safety.  That is a part of the professional Standard of Care.   The AIA ethical guidelines (as well as those of every major professional design organization) emphasize that the licensed professional's obligation to protect the public is elevated even above the duty to serve the Client. 

Ensuring that occupants (in this example) have a way to get out of the building and 'away from it' in an emergency situation is a fundamental consideration... and therefore part of the Standard of Care.  In this example, the building code already makes clear that the pathway has to remain unobstructed, so there is clear guidance.  However, there are other situations that arise in which designers intuitively or by experience understand that providing a safe/healthy building requires something greater than the 'minimum' required by codes.  That is when you need to go 'above and beyond' code minimums in discharging your professional duties.

The absence of explicit building code language (for any given situation) does not provide the designer with a justification to look the other way... ever.   When a client says (as in this particular case) they don't want a railing, bollard, curbed island, etc., that is not an excuse to eliminate prudent protection measures from your design (i.e. to ensure the exit is not blocked). 

Saving space and/or money may be the Owner's concern, but the Standard of Care demands the designer stand up and be counted.   Do not let your client's perspective cloud your professional judgment.  Tell your client that it is your decision that a physical device is required.  Do not sign/seal a design that does not, in your opinion, meet with your underlying obligation for protection of building occupants.  Nobody can force you to issue a design that fails to meet the Standard of Care. 

And to those who think they can blame later consequences on an Owner's decision (demand) to overlook a safety issue...  be aware that no document the Owner says it will sign, waiving your concerns, will legally protect you from a negligence claim. 

It is you, the Architect - not the Owner - that is responsible for a 'safe' design.  It is you, the Architect - not the Owner - that will be held responsible if occupants end up being injured or killed because the exit door was blocked (AND IF your design, which should have anticipated this possibility, was negligent).   

Architects want to be held in high esteem.  Part of earning praise is standing up for what is 'right'.  Be the 'leader' you want others to think you are.  When the Standard of Care begs for something that is not explicitly dictated by building code language, you need to firmly (and politely) explain to your client that you are the one in charge (and the one that has responsibility for your safe design).  If your client is unwilling to allow you to exercise your professional duties property, let him/her pay you for what you have done to date and shop around for  someone else that is willing to bend to his/her will (and assume the risk). 

-------------------------------------------
Howard Littman AIA
Forensic Architect, Expert Witness
Howard I. Littman, AIA
Agoura Hills CA
-------------------------------------------

I suggest you refer to Sections 1027.1, 1027.5, and 1003.6 of the 2012 IBC, or similar sections of earlier versions if you are still under their jurisdiction.  These address Code required access to the exterior and subsequently to a public way for exits and requirements to keep the exit clear and free of obstructions other than as allowed by the Code.

-------------------------------------------
Craig Hess AIA
Elness Swenson Graham Architects, Inc.
Maplewood MN
-------------------------------------------






Original Message:
Sent: 03-17-2014 16:52
From: Daryl Bray
Subject: Maintaining Unobstructed means of Egress from the Exterior

This message has been cross posted to the following Discussion Forums: Retail and Entertainment and Practice Management Member Conversations .
-------------------------------------------
Does anyone have any specific recommendations for preventing vehicular obstructions at required means of egress?  For example, in large retail centers, many times the rear or sides of buildings have egress doors which exit directly onto pavement (no curb, no elevated stoop).  There is nothing (short of common sense) to prevent a vehicle from parking alongside the exit door thereby preventing occupants from using that door as a means of egress.  Our firm typically provides bollards for this scenario on new construction, but there is nothing specific in the code (that I can find) which REQUIRES anything.  Convincing an owner of an existing facility to put bollards in at a door that's been that way for 30 years is difficult. We've recommended adding signage to the exterior side of the door which states "No parking at any time" but some clients even object to that and deem it unnecessary.

Any suggestions or insight would be appreciated - both from a design standpoint and from a risk management standpoint (the architect's liability for NOT providing bollards, signage, etc.).

-------------------------------------------
Daryl Bray AIA
SGA Design Group, P.C.
Tulsa OK
-------------------------------------------

Daryl,

2012 IBC Section 1027.5 states that a building's "exit discharge shall provide a direct and unobstructed access to a public way". Bollards seem like a good way to prevent a parked car from blocking the exit and allowing occupants the required access.

-------------------------------------------
Timothy Whiteley AIA
Welsh Whiteley Architects, LLC
Ketchikan AK
-------------------------------------------






Original Message:
Sent: 03-17-2014 16:52
From: Daryl Bray
Subject: Maintaining Unobstructed means of Egress from the Exterior

This message has been cross posted to the following Discussion Forums: Retail and Entertainment and Practice Management Member Conversations .
-------------------------------------------
Does anyone have any specific recommendations for preventing vehicular obstructions at required means of egress?  For example, in large retail centers, many times the rear or sides of buildings have egress doors which exit directly onto pavement (no curb, no elevated stoop).  There is nothing (short of common sense) to prevent a vehicle from parking alongside the exit door thereby preventing occupants from using that door as a means of egress.  Our firm typically provides bollards for this scenario on new construction, but there is nothing specific in the code (that I can find) which REQUIRES anything.  Convincing an owner of an existing facility to put bollards in at a door that's been that way for 30 years is difficult. We've recommended adding signage to the exterior side of the door which states "No parking at any time" but some clients even object to that and deem it unnecessary.

Any suggestions or insight would be appreciated - both from a design standpoint and from a risk management standpoint (the architect's liability for NOT providing bollards, signage, etc.).

-------------------------------------------
Daryl Bray AIA
SGA Design Group, P.C.
Tulsa OK
-------------------------------------------

Hi Daryl,
2009 IBC states in 1027.6, "the exit discharge shall provide a direct and unobstructed access to a public way."  Hope that helps.
-------------------------------------------
Lester Lloyd AIA
Principal
Lloyd Architects
Plymouth MA
-------------------------------------------






Original Message:
Sent: 03-17-2014 16:52
From: Daryl Bray
Subject: Maintaining Unobstructed means of Egress from the Exterior

This message has been cross posted to the following Discussion Forums: Retail and Entertainment and Practice Management Member Conversations .
-------------------------------------------
Does anyone have any specific recommendations for preventing vehicular obstructions at required means of egress?  For example, in large retail centers, many times the rear or sides of buildings have egress doors which exit directly onto pavement (no curb, no elevated stoop).  There is nothing (short of common sense) to prevent a vehicle from parking alongside the exit door thereby preventing occupants from using that door as a means of egress.  Our firm typically provides bollards for this scenario on new construction, but there is nothing specific in the code (that I can find) which REQUIRES anything.  Convincing an owner of an existing facility to put bollards in at a door that's been that way for 30 years is difficult. We've recommended adding signage to the exterior side of the door which states "No parking at any time" but some clients even object to that and deem it unnecessary.

Any suggestions or insight would be appreciated - both from a design standpoint and from a risk management standpoint (the architect's liability for NOT providing bollards, signage, etc.).

-------------------------------------------
Daryl Bray AIA
SGA Design Group, P.C.
Tulsa OK
-------------------------------------------

This is a building code issue as well.  Providing a reliable means of egress is a requirement and as architects we are charged with protecting the health, safety and welfare of all building occupants.  The solution is a matter of design (bollards seem like a fairly simple, cheap, and effective solution for the back of a strip mall), but resistance to providing a solution from your client is the real problem.  Can you get assistance from the AHJ?  Withholding a Certificate of Occupancy may be sufficient motivation.

-------------------------------------------
William Downing AIA
Rohrbach Associates P.C.
Iowa City IA
-------------------------------------------






Original Message:
Sent: 03-17-2014 16:52
From: Daryl Bray
Subject: Maintaining Unobstructed means of Egress from the Exterior

This message has been cross posted to the following Discussion Forums: Retail and Entertainment and Practice Management Member Conversations .
-------------------------------------------
Does anyone have any specific recommendations for preventing vehicular obstructions at required means of egress?  For example, in large retail centers, many times the rear or sides of buildings have egress doors which exit directly onto pavement (no curb, no elevated stoop).  There is nothing (short of common sense) to prevent a vehicle from parking alongside the exit door thereby preventing occupants from using that door as a means of egress.  Our firm typically provides bollards for this scenario on new construction, but there is nothing specific in the code (that I can find) which REQUIRES anything.  Convincing an owner of an existing facility to put bollards in at a door that's been that way for 30 years is difficult. We've recommended adding signage to the exterior side of the door which states "No parking at any time" but some clients even object to that and deem it unnecessary.

Any suggestions or insight would be appreciated - both from a design standpoint and from a risk management standpoint (the architect's liability for NOT providing bollards, signage, etc.).

-------------------------------------------
Daryl Bray AIA
SGA Design Group, P.C.
Tulsa OK
-------------------------------------------

Hi, here in New Orleans we have to work with both the IBC and NFPA. So I consulted NFPA 101 because I recently had to deal with a similar issue.

I believe Section 7.1.10 of NFPA 101 "Means of Egress Reliability" makes it clear that the Means of Egress, in this case the exit discharge component, should remain free of obstructions. It goes on to say in 7.1.10.2.2 that railings or barriers should be installed to protect against encroachment. So a blocked exit door would surely fall under this section.

-------------------------------------------
Douglas Mayo AIA
Doug Mayo Architect
New Orleans LA
-------------------------------------------

bollards on either side of the door landing.

-------------------------------------------
Kerry Hogue AIA
HKS, Inc.
Dallas TX
-------------------------------------------






Original Message:
Sent: 03-17-2014 16:52
From: Daryl Bray
Subject: Maintaining Unobstructed means of Egress from the Exterior

This message has been cross posted to the following Discussion Forums: Retail and Entertainment and Practice Management Member Conversations .
-------------------------------------------
Does anyone have any specific recommendations for preventing vehicular obstructions at required means of egress?  For example, in large retail centers, many times the rear or sides of buildings have egress doors which exit directly onto pavement (no curb, no elevated stoop).  There is nothing (short of common sense) to prevent a vehicle from parking alongside the exit door thereby preventing occupants from using that door as a means of egress.  Our firm typically provides bollards for this scenario on new construction, but there is nothing specific in the code (that I can find) which REQUIRES anything.  Convincing an owner of an existing facility to put bollards in at a door that's been that way for 30 years is difficult. We've recommended adding signage to the exterior side of the door which states "No parking at any time" but some clients even object to that and deem it unnecessary.

Any suggestions or insight would be appreciated - both from a design standpoint and from a risk management standpoint (the architect's liability for NOT providing bollards, signage, etc.).

-------------------------------------------
Daryl Bray AIA
SGA Design Group, P.C.
Tulsa OK
-------------------------------------------

We need to remember that part of the exit is the exit discharge to a save area of refuge which means that exits go beyond the actual door and
cannot be restricted in any way.

-------------------------------------------
E Michael Shackley AIA
Architect
Beta Design Group, P.C.
Stone Mountain GA
-------------------------------------------






Original Message:
Sent: 03-17-2014 16:52
From: Daryl Bray
Subject: Maintaining Unobstructed means of Egress from the Exterior

This message has been cross posted to the following Discussion Forums: Retail and Entertainment and Practice Management Member Conversations .
-------------------------------------------
Does anyone have any specific recommendations for preventing vehicular obstructions at required means of egress?  For example, in large retail centers, many times the rear or sides of buildings have egress doors which exit directly onto pavement (no curb, no elevated stoop).  There is nothing (short of common sense) to prevent a vehicle from parking alongside the exit door thereby preventing occupants from using that door as a means of egress.  Our firm typically provides bollards for this scenario on new construction, but there is nothing specific in the code (that I can find) which REQUIRES anything.  Convincing an owner of an existing facility to put bollards in at a door that's been that way for 30 years is difficult. We've recommended adding signage to the exterior side of the door which states "No parking at any time" but some clients even object to that and deem it unnecessary.

Any suggestions or insight would be appreciated - both from a design standpoint and from a risk management standpoint (the architect's liability for NOT providing bollards, signage, etc.).

-------------------------------------------
Daryl Bray AIA
SGA Design Group, P.C.
Tulsa OK
-------------------------------------------

Daryl, the responses already given to your question are correct that the code requires that the Exit Discharge must provide direct and unobstructed access to the Public Way. I believe there are two parts to this questions. 1 - how do you define unobstructed, and 2 - how do you convince an unwilling client to comply when the code is not black and white.

Regarding #1, is paint on the pavement or a sign on the door sufficient to keep the exit access unobstructed, or is a physical barrier like a curb or bollards required? In the case where the area also serves as an access drive or loading area, where vehicles are expected, I would argue that physical barriers are necessary.

Regarding #2 - This is a bit more difficult, but if you truly believe the physical barriers area necessary (as I do) and your client will not yield, I would have a discussion with the local code official and express your concerns. 

-------------------------------------------
Robert M. Longo AIA
Partner
Cornerstone Architectural Group
South Plainfield NJ
-------------------------------------------






Original Message:
Sent: 03-17-2014 16:52
From: Daryl Bray
Subject: Maintaining Unobstructed means of Egress from the Exterior

This message has been cross posted to the following Discussion Forums: Retail and Entertainment and Practice Management Member Conversations .
-------------------------------------------
Does anyone have any specific recommendations for preventing vehicular obstructions at required means of egress?  For example, in large retail centers, many times the rear or sides of buildings have egress doors which exit directly onto pavement (no curb, no elevated stoop).  There is nothing (short of common sense) to prevent a vehicle from parking alongside the exit door thereby preventing occupants from using that door as a means of egress.  Our firm typically provides bollards for this scenario on new construction, but there is nothing specific in the code (that I can find) which REQUIRES anything.  Convincing an owner of an existing facility to put bollards in at a door that's been that way for 30 years is difficult. We've recommended adding signage to the exterior side of the door which states "No parking at any time" but some clients even object to that and deem it unnecessary.

Any suggestions or insight would be appreciated - both from a design standpoint and from a risk management standpoint (the architect's liability for NOT providing bollards, signage, etc.).

-------------------------------------------
Daryl Bray AIA
SGA Design Group, P.C.
Tulsa OK
-------------------------------------------