# When is a glass panel required in an exterior door of a public building.



## brent (Jan 24, 2017)

When or is a glass vision panel required in an exterior door of a public building. I ask because I am a public school teacher and I have seen people get hit with the door when it opens if they are not carefully watching. The door is a metal double leaf door that opens to the outside of the building.


----------



## fatboy (Jan 24, 2017)

No requirement............welcome to the forum.


----------



## brent (Jan 24, 2017)

Thank you, I just did not know because it seems to be a safety issue. It would seem to make since to be able to look through the other side and avoid getting hit.

Thanks for your prompt reply


----------



## fatboy (Jan 24, 2017)

Often these types of doors are emergency/fire exits, and in that circumstance, smacking someone with the door would be the least of anyone's worries.


----------



## brent (Jan 24, 2017)

That makes complete sense. This door is a high traffic door that is used constantly, from
going from one building to another by staff and students. Someone in my building nose
got broken, because someone opened the door right at the same time she was grabbing
the handle.


----------



## Msradell (Jan 24, 2017)

As stated earlier it's not a requirement and may not even be allowed depending on the fire rating of the door. However, it's quite possible that it would be permitted and doable and if you suggested to the powers that be is a safety improvement you may be able to get it done.


----------



## cda (Jan 24, 2017)

Welcome

Teachers are great!!

Maybe signage open door slowly or something


----------



## tmurray (Feb 1, 2017)

cda said:


> Welcome
> 
> Teachers are great!!
> 
> Maybe signage open door slowly or something



...magnetic hold opens connected to fire alarm...

All heavy use fire doors should have these. And if you're in a facility that ticks of the fire door and heavy use boxes, it should be do-able from a budget perspective.


----------



## Yikes (Feb 1, 2017)

At many schools, I've seen them apply a semicircle line on the floor to indicate the extent of the door swing, so that people will have a warning when walking by an outswinging door; however, this is not required by code.  

The other posters are correct, vision panels in doors are not required by code.  As a gross generalization, more glass = more issues with protection from heat during a fire, unless you get certain (expensive) kinds of specialty glass.
There are certain situations (for example, bathroom doors) where you would value privacy or security more than vision, and we want the code give us enough leeway as designers to make the safety call on a case-by-case basis, rather than a one-size-fits-all rule.

The signage on the inside of the door may be your best bet, and it has the added benefit of raising their awareness about similar door situations when they are not in school.  Though I have to say, in my high school the sign below would have been perceived as an opportunity for mischief, not a warning:


----------



## ADAguy (Feb 3, 2017)

signs only assist the sighted.


----------



## Francis Vineyard (Feb 3, 2017)

An inexpensive suggestion could be a large DoorScope. They are also available for fire-rated doors. 

"The large DoorScope peephole is a wide-angle door viewer using advanced optics to project the image outside your door through a prism and onto a viewing lens, giving you 168 degrees of visibility.

With the large DoorScope wide-angle door viewer you can see what is going on outside your door from up to 7 feet away. The large DoorScope is great for children, the handicapped, short-stature adults, the elderly and the visually impaired."

Almost smacked an officer recently on my way out; a couple of days later they put one of these in; works great.


----------



## ADAguy (Feb 3, 2017)

only assists those who can see.


----------



## mtlogcabin (Feb 3, 2017)

So your suggestions is do nothing for those who can see? Your 2 comment are not making sense


----------



## Paul Sweet (Feb 3, 2017)

"signs only assist the sighted."

So do vision panels.


----------



## fatboy (Feb 3, 2017)

We could get really lost in the weeds with the disability question.

The OP asked, when and if it is a requirement to have a vision panel in an exterior door. 

Question answered...........no, not a requirement. 

Yes, many options available, some may work for all, all may work for some..........but there may not be any answer for some. 

We could kicked this to the curb and back a million times, no right answer.


----------



## ADAguy (Feb 6, 2017)

Here again is the ongoing "it depends"; not just on best practice, code and law but on standard of care in the area in which the work is performed.
Ultimately a risk management issue.


----------



## fatboy (Feb 7, 2017)

Victoria Baggett said:


> It is extremely unsafe that the entryway open from both destinations. kindly contact entryway repair as quickly as to defeat the danger of injuries. And it is an both-side door toilet so please resurface the latrine when possible. There are such a large number of site who come at instant and repair the door.You can get in touch with them through their sites.



HUH? I think something is getting lost in the translation..........


----------



## ADAguy (Feb 7, 2017)

They speak funny in :U"tah, don't they?


----------



## ADAguy (Feb 24, 2017)

Welcome to our "merry" band Robert.


----------



## Yikes (Feb 24, 2017)

If you look at the previous replies by both "Victoria Baggett" and "Robert Carpenter" (who has posted previously just once before on these forums with a marketing link), I strongly suspect that Victoria and Robert are names of real persons somewhere on this planet, but in this case their names have been hijacked by some 3rd party who is establishing a trail of posts in order to return later and soft-sell us to some links elsewhere as part of their stealth advertising effort.  (I know a real "Robert Carpenter" who is an architect, and he would never do this or respond like that.)
I am going to click the "report" buttons for the administrator to review, and if I'm wrong, I apologize to these newer members.


----------



## ADAguy (Feb 24, 2017)

Aha, a "sleeper" hacker?


----------



## fatboy (Feb 24, 2017)

Users have been banned, posts deleted. Soft delete on this one, as there were subsequent comments that would have to be removed, I'm not comfortable doing that.


----------



## tmurray (Feb 27, 2017)

Yikes said:


> If you look at the previous replies by both "Victoria Baggett" and "Robert Carpenter" (who has posted previously just once before on these forums with a marketing link), I strongly suspect that Victoria and Robert are names of real persons somewhere on this planet, but in this case their names have been hijacked by some 3rd party who is establishing a trail of posts in order to return later and soft-sell us to some links elsewhere as part of their stealth advertising effort.  (I know a real "Robert Carpenter" who is an architect, and he would never do this or respond like that.)
> I am going to click the "report" buttons for the administrator to review, and if I'm wrong, I apologize to these newer members.



What typically happens is that they post relatively on topic comments and the later return and edit their posts for advertisements. Since Jeff prevents them from editing posts beyond a fairly short window, this is not an issue in our forum.


----------



## Jmb (Feb 27, 2017)

Brent,
The code is the minimum that a building owner need to meet.
When an design professional designs a building, generally they will get a building permit with a set of drawings that get a D- Grade... this is barely passing, but that is all they need to meet code.Building owners don't want to spend more money than they have too.

Your scenario is a good example: vision panel not required but would be a good idea


----------



## Yikes (Feb 28, 2017)

Jmb said:


> this is barely passing, but that is all they need to meet code.
> Your scenario is a good example: vision panel not required but would be a good idea



I agree with the above comment, but I wouldn't give it the same analogy as a D- grade.

* I use 87 octane in my car instead of 89 or 91, but I don't refer to it as D- gasoline.
* I see a football player make a catch with his toes just barely in bounds, I don't call him a D- player.
* If I buy a new car Toyota instead of a Lexus, I don't assume the Toyota is a D- car.  I bought a car that is street legal, and able to do the job it was designed for.  If I want a vehicle with more features, including safety features like collision avoidance monitoring, that is my choice, but it doesn't mean a vehicle without this equipment is a D- vehicle.


----------



## Jmb (Feb 28, 2017)

Yikes said:


> I agree with the above comment, but I wouldn't give it the same analogy as a D- grade.
> 
> * I use 87 octane in my car instead of 89 or 91, but I don't refer to it as D- gasoline.
> * I see a football player make a catch with his toes just barely in bounds, I don't call him a D- player.
> * If I buy a new car Toyota instead of a Lexus, I don't assume the Toyota is a D- car.  I bought a car that is street legal, and able to do the job it was designed for.  If I want a vehicle with more features, including safety features like collision avoidance monitoring, that is my choice, but it doesn't mean a vehicle without this equipment is a D- vehicle.




OK, maybe a D+


----------



## Yikes (Feb 28, 2017)

I'm a glass-half-full kinda guy.


----------



## ADAguy (Feb 28, 2017)

Ok, so given the choice, you would prefer a Permitable set of drawings to a biddable or buildable set if they were more expensive to produce?


----------



## Yikes (Feb 28, 2017)

We are getting slightly off-topic here from the original post.  It is entirely possible that the school district never intended to have viewport windows in the doors, perhaps for value engineering reasons.  This thread was starting to imply that the architect did barely legal, substandard work and gave it no consideration, when in reality none of us know the background that went into the decisions regarding doors.

In my own practice, I have different clients with different needs for plans.  When I prepare a proposal and fee for services, I ask a client if they generally want one of three levels of design service: 
(1) basic plans (life-safety only); this may be chosen by clients who self-build and who do repetitive construction types, with the same subs.  Oftentimes on smaller projects, the MEP is design-build.
(2) biddable plans, which includes #1 above, plus sufficient scope to establish a competitive, apples-to-apples bid.  This includes interdisciplinary coordination.
(3) highly detailed plans, which includes #2 above, but also a significant amount of additional design to realize a unique aesthetic vision.  An example may include a conference room, where the ceiling finish pattern is coordinated with sprinkler heads, projection equipment, etc.


----------



## tmurray (Mar 1, 2017)

Yikes said:


> We are getting slightly off-topic here from the original post.  It is entirely possible that the school district never intended to have viewport windows in the doors, perhaps for value engineering reasons.  This thread was starting to imply that the architect did barely legal, substandard work and gave it no consideration, when in reality none of us know the background that went into the decisions regarding doors.


 Agreed, it could be prone to impact and breakage or security may also be a required feature. Not knowing the specifics, all we can do is hypothesize.


----------

