# stairway a required means of egress



## fcllc (Feb 6, 2015)

Here is my project info before I ask a question:

2003 IBC

1 story building with a basement (this basement is not a story) type VB, non-sprinklered, non separated, mixed use, group B/ S-1, 2349 SqFt per floor. Main floor occupant load 23 in group b, basement is 5 in B, 6 in S-1. Main floor is a dentist office. Basement contains staff room, bathroom, IT closet, remainder is storage and mechanicals. Main floor has 2 exits; basement has 1 exit and 3 window wells with egress windows.

My question is, is this stairway considered a part of required means of egress system?

If it is not I would be able to apply 707.2 exception 7, and not have a shaft enclosure. Or am I looking at this wrong and since I am connecting 2 levels, not 2 stories (as stated in the commentary) a shaft would not be required, I think this might be a stretch though. I have been reading so much the lines are starting to blur and I am confusing myself. Please help restore my sanity.


----------



## steveray (Feb 6, 2015)

Yes...it is egress from the basement.....Existing building I assume? CPET from most remote point in basement? The basement is a story, just not above grade plane...


----------



## steveray (Feb 6, 2015)

903.2.10.1 Stories and basements without openings. [F]

An automatic sprinkler system shall be installed throughout every story or basement of all buildings where the floor area exceeds 1,500 square feet (139.4 m2) and where there is not provided at least one of the following types of exterior wall openings:1. Openings below grade that lead directly to ground level by an exterior stairway complying with Section 1009 or an outside ramp complying with Section 1010. Openings shall be located in each 50 linear feet (15 240 mm), or fraction thereof, of exterior wall in the story on at least one side.

2. Openings entirely above the adjoining ground level totaling at least 20 square feet (1.86 m2) in each 50 linear feet (15 240 mm), or fraction thereof, of exterior wall in the story on at least one side.

I would question the lack of an accessible route to the basement as well..


----------



## cda (Feb 6, 2015)

3 window wells with egress windows.

As in for bedroom?


----------



## steveray (Feb 6, 2015)

cda said:
			
		

> 3 window wells with egress windows.As in for bedroom?


CDA...I am thinking windows to get of sprinklering with the above section or light and ventilation...


----------



## cda (Feb 6, 2015)

From the 2009 commentary

Exception 7 addresses the issue of floor openings and air transfer openings that are not a part of the required means of egress. For example, convenience stairways are often provided for building occupants. Such stairways serve as a means of communication between two adjacent floors and are not used as a required means of egress component. To maintain the integrity of the exit access corridor, such stairways may not connect with an exit access corridor in Groups I and R [see Figure 708.2(3)] because occupants can be sleeping and the integrity of the corridor system is especially important under such conditions.

Supplemental stairways are also not permitted to be connected to any other floor opening that connects to an additional floor level. Such stairways must be separated from such floor openings by construction that complies with this section for shaft enclosures. This requirement limits the use of this provision so that an opening between two stories does not openly communicate with another opening to an additional story and, therefore, interconnect three or more different levels. Stairways must also comply with other requirements of Chapter 10, such as headroom, handrails, guards, and tread and riser relationships.


----------



## mtlogcabin (Feb 6, 2015)

> My question is, is this stairway considered a part of required means of egress system? basement has 1 exit


Yes it is the only means of egress out of that basement

1019.1 requires the vertical exit enclosure to be a minimum one-hour rated unless the building is sprinklered

1019.1 Enclosures required.

Interior exit stairways and interior exit ramps shall be enclosed with fire barriers. Exit enclosures shall have a fire-resistance rating of not less than 2 hours where connecting four stories or more and not less than 1 hour where connecting less than four stories. The number of stories connected by the shaft enclosure shall include any basements but not any mezzanines. An exit enclosure shall not be used for any purpose other than means of egress. Enclosures shall be constructed as fire barriers in accordance with Section 706.

Exceptions:

1. In other than Group H and I occupancies, a stairway serving an occupant load of less than 10 not more than one story above the level of exit discharge is not required to be enclosed.

2. Exits in buildings of Group A-5 where all portions of the means of egress are essentially open to the outside need not be enclosed.

3. Stairways serving and contained within a single residential dwelling unit or sleeping unit in occupancies in Group R-2 or R-3 and sleeping units in occupancies in Group R-1 are not required to be enclosed.

4. Stairways that are not a required means of egress element are not required to be enclosed where such stairways comply with Section 707.2.

5. Stairways in open parking structures which serve only the parking structure are not required to be enclosed.

6. Stairways in occupancies in Group I-3 as provided for in Section 408.3.6 are not required to be enclosed.

7. Means of egress stairways as required by Section 410.5.4 are not required to be enclosed.

8. In other than occupancy Groups H and I, a maximum of 50 percent of egress stairways serving one adjacent floor are not required to be enclosed, provided at least two means of egress are provided from both floors served by the unenclosed stairways. Any two such interconnected floors shall not be open to other floors.

9. In other than occupancy Groups H and I, interior egress stairways serving only the first and second stories of a building equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 are not required to be enclosed, provided at least two means of egress are provided from both floors served by the unenclosed stairways. Such interconnected stories shall not be open to other stories

Table 1018.2 limits the travel distance to a maximum 75 ft. CPET does not even come into play with a single exit


----------



## fcllc (Feb 6, 2015)

sorry guys, I read your responses and realized I screwed up how I presented info. There is an exit in the basement to outside. It is a new building. The windows are for light, ventilation and to get out of sprinklers like Steveray said.


----------



## mtlogcabin (Feb 6, 2015)

> 7.2. Is not part of the required means of egress system except as permitted in Section 1019.1.


If you can meet the maximum travel distance of 75 ft with the exit that leads directly outside then I agree is is not part of the means of egress and not required to be rated.


----------



## fcllc (Feb 6, 2015)

i miss by 3ft


----------



## mtlogcabin (Feb 6, 2015)

Some measure at 90 degrees along the wall. Others come off the wall 1.5 to 2 ft for the line to measure. Ask the AHJ how they measure and if they are willing to entertain a trade off such as smoke and heat detectors for occupant notification only, built in cabinetry, shelving or closets. Can you move the door one direction or another?


----------



## fcllc (Feb 6, 2015)

I had a travel issue in this town a few years back, on an existing building not meeting due to the way it was divided, before we got there. The owner was an alarm company so they wanted to do the detectors rather than add an opening, it was free for them, AHJ would not have any of it, we had to put in another door. Moving the door wont help, So unless the egress windows with wells count as an exit to grade I will be enclosing the stairs, which as usual the customer does not want, and cant understand when I say because the code says so.


----------



## mtlogcabin (Feb 6, 2015)

The 75 ft is an arbitrary number and a baby could crawl 3 ft in about 1.5 second.

Black and white building department code application is a real sore spot with me.

If an alternative is proposed to the 75 ft maximum travel and well documented there should be no reason not to allow the open stair.


----------



## cda (Feb 6, 2015)

fcllc said:
			
		

> I had a travel issue in this town a few years back, on an existing building not meeting due to the way it was divided, before we got there. The owner was an alarm company so they wanted to do the detectors rather than add an opening, it was free for them, AHJ would not have any of it, we had to put in another door. Moving the door wont help, So unless the egress windows with wells count as an exit to grade I will be enclosing the stairs, which as usual the customer does not want, and cant understand when I say because the code says so.


Submit it and see how they measure it


----------



## fcllc (Feb 6, 2015)

I had a travel issue in this town a few years back, on an existing building not meeting due to the way it was divided, before we got there. The owner was an alarm company so they wanted to do the detectors rather than add an opening, it was free for them, AHJ would not have any of it, we had to put in another door. Moving the door wont help, So unless the egress windows with wells count as an exit to grade I will be enclosing the stairs, which as usual the customer does not want, and cant understand when I say because the code says so.


----------



## fcllc (Feb 6, 2015)

I guess it doesn't hurt to try, although they did make go for a modification in a finished basement for a duct to floor clearance that missed by a half inch


----------



## cda (Feb 6, 2015)

fcllc said:
			
		

> I guess it doesn't hurt to try, although they did make go for a modification in a finished basement for a duct to floor clearance that missed by a half inch


What, they only get one plan a year to review, so they run it through the "computer plan analyzer" ????


----------



## mtlogcabin (Feb 6, 2015)

Just checked the 2003 commentary

"frequently excludes areas of the building within 1 foot of walls,corners, columns and other permanent construction.......the natural route is generally measured through the center-line of the door opening

Maybe that will help


----------



## fcllc (Feb 9, 2015)

I have been reading again, so now my question has changed, if I use an exit passageway to reduce travel to less than 75 ft from the furthest point to the entrance of the exit passageway,(as stated in the comentary1020.1) does the stairway have to be enclosed? it will not be open to the passageway.


----------



## JPohling (Feb 9, 2015)

yes,  you cannot go from a protected environment to a non protected one


----------



## mtlogcabin (Feb 9, 2015)

Good solution for your client.

The interior stair would not have to be rated since a second exit is no longer required due to the travel distance requirement for a single exit.

1019.1 exception 4


----------



## JPohling (Feb 9, 2015)

Perhaps i misunderstood................the exit passageway is not leading to the stairway?


----------



## mtlogcabin (Feb 9, 2015)

My understanding is the exit passageway would lead to the exterior door, (exit discharge) for the walk out basement.


----------



## fcllc (Feb 9, 2015)

The passageway leads to an exterior door. There is a short hallway from the stairs to the passageway that would have a rated door, so the stair would not be open to the passageway.


----------



## JPohling (Feb 9, 2015)

Ok, walk out basement.......... that makes more sense now


----------



## JBI (Feb 9, 2015)

Add a rated exit passageway at the exit door for a few feet more than you need. It can act as a vestibule. Though enclosing the stairs might be easier and cheaper...


----------



## RLGA (Feb 10, 2015)

Did anyone bother to look at Exception 8 to Section 1019.1?  I don't think the stairway needs to be enclosed, thus allowing it to be one of two means of egress, which solves the common path of egress travel issue.


----------



## mtlogcabin (Feb 10, 2015)

Yes I did but I was hung up on the 50% thinking it only applied if there where 2 or more stairs. In this case with a direct exit out of the basement and one interior stair I agree exception 8 would be applicable. Now if the local AHJ agrees then the original design works. If they disagree then the exit passageway is an option.


----------



## RLGA (Feb 10, 2015)

Mtlogcabin:  I see what you're getting at.  The IBC has evolved significantly since the 2003 edition.  I think the intent of Exception 8 is that two means of egress be available and that one need not be enclosed.  Thus, the exit directly to the exterior is actually better than an enclosed stairway to the upper level.


----------



## steveray (Feb 11, 2015)

RLGA said:
			
		

> Mtlogcabin:  I see what you're getting at.  The IBC has evolved significantly since the 2003 edition.  I think the intent of Exception 8 is that two means of egress be available and that one need not be enclosed.  Thus, the exit directly to the exterior is actually better than an enclosed stairway to the upper level.


We are a little slow here in CT....But I do agree with Ron and MT ,it should be compliant "as is" barring what we can't see..


----------



## fcllc (Feb 11, 2015)

I think I will have to go with the exit passageway and 1 exit, the remote distance I need between exits is 41' and I don't have it between the door and stair. I will try to post the drawing of this basement.


----------



## fcllc (Feb 17, 2015)

Here is what i plan to do, any comments would be helpful.

View attachment 1139


View attachment 1139


/monthly_2015_02/572953d4f3671_BASEMENTWALLS2.jpg.a0eba85688a4c1cc5615f3ace0380998.jpg


----------



## steveray (Feb 18, 2015)

I think this is a problem.....If anyone gets to use the interior stairs as a route....

1104.5 Location.

Accessible routes shall coincide with or be located in the same area as a general circulation path. Where the circulation path is interior, the accessible route shall also be interior.

24" on the pull side of the break room looks close too...


----------



## fcllc (Feb 18, 2015)

I'm sorry, I don't understand where the issue is here, could you elaborate on it? I have read it several times and can't figure it out, I would appreciate knowing what I am missing.


----------



## BayPointArchitect (Feb 18, 2015)

Existing building

Relatively small occupant load

Is the space going to be subdivided into something more complex?

Close enough to the 75' common path of travel

Looks good


----------



## fcllc (Feb 18, 2015)

It's a new building. Entire Main floor is a dental office. Basement will just be storage other than the rooms you see.


----------



## steveray (Feb 18, 2015)

fcllc said:
			
		

> It's a new building. Entire Main floor is a dental office. Basement will just be storage other than the rooms you see.


Is it a required accessible break room and bathroom?  You don't typically get to say "You crippled people go outside and around to the back basement door when you want to use the breakroom, we are taking the stairs".....


----------



## jdfruit (Feb 18, 2015)

Basement level may be exempt; verify with AHJ

1104.4 Multilevel buildings and facilities. At least one accessible

route shall connect each accessible level, including mezzanines,

in multilevel buildings and facilities.

Exceptions:

1. An accessible route is not required to stories and

mezzanines above and below accessible levels that

have an aggregate area of not more than 3,000

square feet (278.7 m2). This exception shall not

apply to:

1.1. Multiple tenant facilities of GroupMoccupancies

containing five or more tenant

spaces;

1.2. Levels containing offices of health care

providers (Group B or I); or

1.3. Passenger transportation facilities and airports

(Group A-3 or B).

However there is this:

1104.3.1 Employee work areas. Common use circulation

paths within employee work areas shall be accessible

routes.


----------



## fcllc (Feb 18, 2015)

1104.4 exception 1 works for for this. The definition of EMPLOYEE WORK AREA. All or any portion of a space used only by employees and only for work. Corridors, toilet rooms, kitchenettes and break rooms are not employee work areas. So I think I am OK on 1104.3.1


----------



## steveray (Feb 18, 2015)

"OUR" 1103.2.15 #2 may get you out of the level needing to be accessible...But they would be opening themselves up for ADA issues I imagine if the make that new employee go outside to get to the breakroom....


----------



## jdfruit (Feb 18, 2015)

fcllc; there better be a separate public restroom, separate employee restroom, and separate employee break room on the main (first) floor or you do not have equivalence nor fully meet exceptions, see 1.2 in post #37 where floor level exception does not apply. Even though the level may be exempt, there is a general ADA requirement to provide access for the public accommodation be it for clients or employees.

Check with your AHJ for sure. Also the Owner is responsible for ADA compliance via your design, that is why I brought up the public accommodation concept.


----------



## mtlogcabin (Feb 18, 2015)

I believe a lot of the grocery store chains got hit by this same issue. You cannot provide "employee" facilities that are not accessible to all employees.

http://www.foxrothschild.com/newspubs/newspubsArticle.aspx?id=4294971857


----------

