Certain doors on campus lack deadbolts that allow doors to be locked from the inside. The campus lockdown on Jan. 15 and the inability to lock these doors had some students and faculty questioning their safety should an emergency situation occur.
Student Peter Conley was trapped in his classroom for over six hours during the lockdown. He was inside a room that had doors with deadbolts on all exits.
Conley said that, had those doors not been lockable, his anxiety during the situation would have been much higher, causing him to stay in a high-alert position for longer. Conley said that his professor issued instructions on what actions to take should an active shooter attempt to enter their classroom.
“The professor told us that if it was an active shooter, that we should throw everything we could get our hands on, and that he would charge the shooter. There is nothing else you can do in that situation,” said Conley.
Fred Diamond, director of facilities, estimated 90 percent of doors are currently equipped with internally lockable thumbturn deadbolts.
This is in part due to a ongoing retrofitting effort. The remaining 10 percent of doors fall into three categories.
The first, Diamond said, are those doors which are mandated by law to retain panic-bars. Panic-bars, also known as crush-bars, perform a lifesaving function in the event of a fire.
An inward-swinging door equipped with a conventional handle can trap panicked occupants crowded around an exit, Diamond said.
Panic-bar doors curtail this by opening via pushing, and always swing outward. The way by which panic-bars work make it impossible to fit these doors with a thumbturn deadbolt.
The requirements to have panic-bars are determined by factors like occupancy rating as well as for what the room will be used, Diamond said.
For example, rooms that are expected to hold larger groups of people or contain materials that increase risk of fire, like a chemistry laboratory, may require additional fire precautions, such as panic-bar doors.
In part these determinations are based on Title 24, Part 9 of California Building Code. This California Fire Code includes regulations for fire-safety for community colleges.
Fire remains a significant threat in California, with the aftermath of the 2018 wildfires still fresh in the minds of many. In the whole U.S., fire accounted for $23 billion in damage in just 2017 alone. 3,400 people lost their lives to these fires.
Building plans, including panic-bar required locations, go through rigorous examination by architects, structural engineers, fire marshals and contractors. The whole planning and checking process can take years.
In addition, all plans are sent to Sacramento to the Division of the State Architect , where they are examined for compliance with building codes and laws. This is the same process by which all public schools undergo planning and construction.
When the plans are approved, construction begins. Contractors make bids on the project and ground is broken, with the plans referenced every step of the way for quality assurance.
Once completed, all parties mentioned above will examine each part of the finished building to ensure adherence to the building plans.
Modifications to the building that can affect fire safety, without approval from responsible parties, including the DSA, is a felony. This includes removing a panic-bar from a door in order to install a thumbturn deadbolt.
Fire is not the only consideration when a structure is built. Any number of potential emergency situations must be considered. If a situation that necessitated a lockdown occurred, there are places on campus in which it would be unsuitable to hide.
The second category of doors are are those that provide access to buildings in which it would be unsafe to hide during a lockdown, Diamond said. For example, a building with inadequate ventilation will not be fitted with internally locking deadbolts. Diamond said this is to discourage individuals from putting themselves at risk by hiding in dangerous areas during emergencies.
The third category are doors that are awaiting modification.
When the retrofitting began, Diamond said, doors were assessed based on the speed and ease with which they could be modified, in order to prioritize where work should be started.
Diamond said the driving force behind these decisions was to “use taxpayer money most efficiently to get students what they need the most.”
Some doors could be easily modified, while others would require more time, effort, and resources. In order to use resources efficiently, the locks that could be modified the fastest were targeted first, followed by those that required moderate intervention. Doors that would require major overhaul were slated to be modified last, Diamond said.
If a lockdown was to occur, individuals in rooms from inside of which the doors cannot be locked, such as those having push-bars for fire safety, the current protocol is to “barricade the door with multiple heavy objects to prevent or delay the intruder from entering the room,” said Ben Macias, director of campus safety, in an email.
