# Stair and Stairway Definition



## RJMCGUIRE (Jun 24, 2013)

I am currently trying to determine exactly when handrails are required for stairs; i.e. exterior stairs.Per IBC, a Stair is defined as a change in elevation, consisting of one or more risers. A Stairway is one or more flights of stairs, either exterior or interior.I currently have a site that requires a steps. The civil engineer as place a few stairs along the path of a sidewalk; i.e. a few steps then a long landing and then a few more steps.

View attachment 1817


is this a situation that would be defined as a stairway; i.e. one or more flights of stairs; thus the handrail requirement comes into play? if I could reduce this design to just one step; would handrails be required?finally, if this is a stairway and handrails are required; then could I use 1009.12; exception 3 by only putting in one step at a time as long as the landing exceed the required depth?Thank you,RM
	

		
			
		

		
	

View attachment 1817


/monthly_2013_06/Capture.JPG.84adc286e2d9fc59cddb6e62ef86be9f.JPG


----------



## mark handler (Jun 24, 2013)

RJMCGUIRE said:
			
		

> ,,, consisting of one or more risers....  if I could reduce this design to just one step; would handrails be required?


....consisting of *one* or more risers....

Yes.

Slope the walk too much and you have a ramp.... and you will need rails....

Are the steps accessible?


----------



## kilitact (Jun 25, 2013)

RJMCGUIRE said:
			
		

> if this is a stairway and handrails are required; then could I use 1009.12; exception 3 by only putting in one step at a time as long as the landing exceed the required depth?
> 
> Thank you,
> 
> RM


no handrail would be required per the exception..


----------



## Builder Bob (Jun 25, 2013)

Mark is on target... regardless of what the code defines as a step, stair, or stairway....... if it is an accessible route (complete with signage -(accessible vs. non-accessible) then it wouldn't matter since an change in elevation over 1/2" would require a ramp or a slope less than 1:20 to remove handrails/wheel guards.


----------



## ICE (Jun 25, 2013)

RJMCGUIRE said:
			
		

> then could I use 1009.12; exception 3 by only putting in one step at a time as long as the landing exceed the required depth?


That might produce an uncomfortable gait.


----------



## Paul Sweet (Jun 25, 2013)

There is a walk on the Virginia state capitol grounds with 6" or so risers spaced 5 to 6 feet apart.  It looks nice, and it's lined with benches, but the gait is very uncomfortable.


----------



## pwood (Jun 25, 2013)

don't use the gait then!


----------



## RJJ (Jun 25, 2013)

Once upon a time this was discussed in the attic stair question!


----------



## fatboy (Jun 25, 2013)

yes it was, ad nauseum...... :beatdhrs


----------



## RJJ (Jun 25, 2013)

Naaaaaaaaaaa!topic


----------



## kilitact (Jun 25, 2013)

RJJ said:
			
		

> Once upon a time this was discussed in the attic stair question!


We're going from inside the building (attic stairs) to outside the building?


----------



## RJJ (Jun 25, 2013)

Roof top access!


----------



## Coug Dad (Jun 25, 2013)

The 2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design does not contain the one step exception found in IBC.


----------



## mark handler (Jun 25, 2013)

Coug Dad said:
			
		

> The 2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design does not contain the one step exception found in IBC.


The intent of the ADASAD is not to have single steps, instead the intent is to provide ramps with the "least slope possible"

The ADASAD does not define a "stair flight" or stair. But does say

505 Handrails

505.2 ... Handrails shall be provided on both sides of stairs and ramps


----------



## kilitact (Jun 26, 2013)

Coug Dad said:
			
		

> The 2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design does not contain the one step exception found in IBC.


Has Texas adopted the 2010 ADA? The OP asked about the exception from chapter 10 of the IBC, which if adopted they can use.


----------



## mark handler (Jun 26, 2013)

kilitact said:
			
		

> Has Texas adopted the 2010 ADA? The OP asked about the exception from chapter 10 of the IBC, which if adopted they can use.


2012 Texas Accessibility Standards Mirrors 2010 ADASAD


----------



## kilitact (Jun 27, 2013)

mark handler said:
			
		

> 2012 Texas Accessibility Standards Mirrors 2010 ADASAD


Than if we have an accessible path of egress handrails would be required otherwise no handrails required.


----------



## mark handler (Jun 27, 2013)

So, is the path required to be accessible?


----------



## kilitact (Jun 27, 2013)

mark handler said:
			
		

> So, is the path required to be accessible?


Is it even considered a path?


----------



## RLM-Architect (Jun 29, 2013)

Do you always answer a question with a question?


----------



## Rider Rick (Jun 29, 2013)

RLM-Architect said:
			
		

> Do you always answer a question with a question?


Not always only when pigs fly.


----------

