Smoke Detector location outside bedroom

Status
Not open for further replies.
C

Chris814m

New User
Location
Central Florida
Occupation
Engineer
I am having a home built with a custom layout. One of the bedrooms (a guest room) is somewhat isolated from the rest of the home. The only way to go from the room to the house internally is through a bathroom. Normally they would come in through the screen front porch through the front door.

The designer diligently followed the rule to locate a smoke detector both inside each bedroom and one just outside of the bedrooms. However, in this case "outside the bedroom" is actually inside a bathroom with a shower (steam).

Is this a situation where there would be an exception to not require a detector "outside of the bedroom", since it is generally recommended to not locate a detector in a bathroom? Wouldn't having the detectors linked together be sufficient to alert the occupant if a fire was detected in another area of the home?

TBMifUP.jpeg
 
Don't know about having a smoke detector inside a bathroom that has a shower or tub. Seen too many alarms being set off even when an alarm is too close to the bath door. Steam from shower or even from cooking causing an alarm leading to people removing the battery or disconnecting them. Counterproductive to intended purpose of having the alarm in the first place. It looks as if the adjacent room already has an alarm in it and I would thing it adequate for intent, with smokes being interconnected.
 
I think the op was curious if he doesn't need one since the bathroom would not be a place a sd would be allowed. IMO, you wouldn't need another sd but that is an authority having jurisdiction call
 
The only two choices are outside or in the bathroom. Neither location would be permitted for a smoke alarm.
 
Was this plan-checked as part of a permitting process? If so they should have noted that location issue, although I'm not at all familiar with Florida Code. R314.3 (4) "Smoke alarms shall be installed not less than a 3 foot (0.91 m) horizontal distance from the door or opening of a bathroom that contains a bathtub or shower unless this would prevent placement of a smoke alarm required by other sections of the code." So you have required location issues, and you have listing issues as standard smoke alarms are not listed for bathrooms.

CA Res. code has a bunch of extra provisions regarding location, and your state might have different amendments. Bottom line is check with your inspector or building department. Are you incorporating an alarm system? If so ask them if your jurisdiction had adopted NFPA 72, that might change things. Consider not having that bathroom open into both rooms? It looks like you can get from the house to the bedroom through the "porch" or whatever that is, so it would be similar to a detached bedroom suite. Might alleviate some of the issues if it didn't open into that other bedroom. Like you said its "custom" which means you will run into design issues like this.
 
As others have noted, the residential code prohibits smoke detectors within 36" of a bathroom door, so I don't see them permitted in the bathroom either.

Not to be an armchair architect...no wait, I will be one. How is it a good idea that the only inside access to the interior of the house from that bedroom takes you through a bathroom and another bedroom??? The occupant in that "transit" bedroom is going to have no privacy, or will find a way to lock the bathroom door all the time. I can't imagine any space programming constraints that make this the best option.
 
Since your question about the smoke detector has been answered, I will take a moment to agree emphatically with @gadfly56.

Why in heavens name would you intentionally design a custom house with this bizarre type of bedroom access? I'm sure you have some kind of reason (e.g., a senior parent who wants some privacy and autonomy). But there are simply better ways to do this. You can still build a bedroom with a private exterior entrance and even with a shared bathroom (although I find such bathrooms extremely awkward, especially when someone forgets to lock both doors during use). But there should at least be internal access via a common space like a hallway.

I assure you, this type of layout will significantly lower the resale value of your home.
 
The last two posts are spot on. Close off the bathroom door to the other bedroom and think of this as a separate suite.
 
Chris814m said:
I am having a home built with a custom layout. One of the bedrooms (a guest room) is somewhat isolated from the rest of the home. The only way to go from the room to the house internally is through a bathroom. Normally they would come in through the screen front porch through the front door.

The designer diligently followed the rule to locate a smoke detector both inside each bedroom and one just outside of the bedrooms. However, in this case "outside the bedroom" is actually inside a bathroom with a shower (steam).

Is this a situation where there would be an exception to not require a detector "outside of the bedroom", since it is generally recommended to not locate a detector in a bathroom? Wouldn't having the detectors linked together be sufficient to alert the occupant if a fire was detected in another area of the home?

TBMifUP.jpeg
Click to expand...
this is a terrible design, the designer is not "diligently following the rules" they are trying to bypass them by putting the bathroom as the only way into the rest of the house. The bathroom location is the problem, not the code.
 
I just finished a very similar project, where a bedroom was only accessible from the exterior. I ended up putting an interconnected heat alarm outside the bedroom door under the roof; it was a screened-in area of an outdoor kitchen.
 
brantmacga said:
I just finished a very similar project, where a bedroom was only accessible from the exterior. I ended up putting an interconnected heat alarm outside the bedroom door under the roof; it was a screened-in area of an outdoor kitchen.
Click to expand...
With your prior experience, do you have any insight into the (non) thought process leading to this design blunder choice?
 
gadfly56 said:
With your prior experience, do you have any insight into the (non) thought process leading to this design blunder choice?
Click to expand...

It wasn’t a main residence; the building was part of a group of buildings at a hobby farm. The main purpose of that particular structure was to be a large outdoor kitchen and dining area. So they had two rooms built on also and one was a spare bedroom for additional guests.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
brantmacga said:
It wasn’t a main residence; the building was part of a group of buildings at a hobby farm. The main purpose of that particular structure was to be a large outdoor kitchen and dining area. So they had two rooms built on also and one was a spare bedroom for additional guests.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
OK, in light of that, not really a blunder, since it was a fancy bunk-room. What about bathroom facilities?
 
brantmacga said:
It wasn’t a main residence; the building was part of a group of buildings at a hobby farm. The main purpose of that particular structure was to be a large outdoor kitchen and dining area. So they had two rooms built on also and one was a spare bedroom for additional guests.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
gadfly56 said:
OK, in light of that, not really a blunder, since it was a fancy bunk-room. What about bathroom facilities?
Click to expand...
Be careful of what you are calling it and subsequent other codes that it may unintentionally invoke. Guest rooms, hotel, and hostels, for instance, depending on location can initiate fire and egress and handicap accessibility issues, beyond just can I put a smoke detector here or there.
 
I showed the drawing to Fire Sub-Code Official that I work with and he said if the detector outside the other bedroom is within 21' of the bedroom door in question he would accept it as being in the vicinity according to the NFPA.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top