# Roof Access Door



## nitramnaed (Sep 20, 2016)

Good Morning
Working with IBC 2012.  Single story Factory building with a two story office.  We have provided a ships ladder up to a door to the roof on the second story of the office.  
Inspector is now saying that because its a door, not a hatch, it needs to have code compliant landings on both sides.  
This is not part of the exit path of travel and is for maintenance purpose only.  I've never run across this requirement before.  It's already constructed and the owner is throwing a fit.
Any help with this?

Thanks, Jeff


----------



## mtlogcabin (Sep 20, 2016)

Ask him for the code section and the charging language that sent him to the code section. Chances are he will use something in Section 1008 and he will be wrong. 
You are correct in what you have done.

1008.1 Doors.
Means of egress doors shall meet the requirements of this section. Doors serving a means of egress system shall meet the requirements of this section and Section 1020.2.

MEANS OF EGRESS. A continuous and unobstructed path of vertical and horizontal egress travel from any occupied portion of a building or structure to a public way. A means of egress consists of three separate and distinct parts: the exit access, the exit and the exit discharge.


----------



## cda (Sep 20, 2016)

That ought to be an interesting site when done.
As stated ask for code section


----------



## Pcinspector1 (Sep 20, 2016)

1009.14 ship ladders


----------



## north star (Sep 20, 2016)

*$ = = $*


nitramnaed,

Did they actually install a door,  or a hatch ?

*=  $ $ =*


----------



## ICE (Sep 20, 2016)

How about a picture.


----------



## linnrg (Sep 20, 2016)

tell him you could not find any good horizontal surface to penetrate so you installed a vertically installed hatch!


----------



## steveray (Sep 21, 2016)

If the hatch does not require the landing, the door does not....Inspector is being foolish. I might ask for a sign or something that would dissuade someone from opening it and stepping through blindly, but that is a one in a million....And sometimes Darwin should win.


----------



## nitramnaed (Sep 21, 2016)

Building Official has rejected all reasonable arguments and just wants it done.  The Owner has thrown in the towel and directed the contractor is re-do the stair.  He just wants his C of O.  Frustrating...Makes us look bad to the Owner.
Here is the response:

"The 2015 Mechanical Code 306.5 and Building Code1209.3 require roof top access for mechanical equipment and appliances on roofs or elevat3ed structures.  This section tells you how to install this stair access.  In number 5 it says the interior stair shall terminate at the underside of the roof hatch or scuttle of 8 square feet.  The door that was installed Is not a roof hatch or scuttle access.  The swinging door installed at the top step is an extremely dangerous way to access the roof top.  For one you have to operate the door by removing your hands off the rail while possibly fighting the wind pushing on the door and all the while carrying parts or tools. The building code does not allow a door to open at the top of a step without a landing only under certain circumstances such as a screen door.  As the building official I will not accept a swinging door without a landing in a means of egress from a roof top down to a mezzanine below.  This is to unsafe.  From a liability stand point I would think you need to change the design and incorporate a landing per code. 
Roofs that have mechanical equipment for servicing does require a means of egress.  The scuttle and or ships ladder is a means of egress.  You cannot be trapped on the roof of a burning building without a means of egress hence the ladder or scuttle.
The 2015 IBC section 1008.1.5 says there shall be a floor or landing on each side of a door.  There are some exceptions 1-5 and your situation does not fall into any of these."

It is what it is...


----------



## mtlogcabin (Sep 21, 2016)

You do not have a stair you have a ladder
Reading all his other reasons such removing a hand and pushing against the wind makes me wonder if he ever opened a roof hatch.

How about going above his head and get a temporary CO while you appeal to the Board of Appeals.


----------



## Pcinspector1 (Sep 21, 2016)

nitramnaed said:


> As the building official I will not accept a swinging door without a landing in a means of egress from a roof top down to a mezzanine below.



From the Definitions: MOE is from any occupied portion of a building, do we have this in this case including vertical egress travel?


----------



## fatboy (Sep 21, 2016)

Asinine that he would accept it if it were a "The scuttle and or ships ladder is a means of egress", or just a ladder going to a scuttle. That is more safe? He's an idiot..........


----------



## cda (Sep 21, 2016)

Replace reframe door and put in what is not a door


----------



## my250r11 (Sep 21, 2016)

The only reason for the hatch or door is to service the equipment on the roof, that does not make it a require egress door. If that was the case you would have landings in all kinds of weird places. I know there is an exception some were for areas like mechanical room, crawlspaces, etc. the exempts them from the MOE.


----------



## ICE (Sep 21, 2016)

I would appreciate a picture.  I am loathe to lambaste the inspector without seeing what the arrangement is.  Not every scenario is addressed by the Code.  So what's a competent, well meaning, inspector supposed to do when they see some blatant unsafe condition?  I know what I do and I have had people here at the forum beat me up for it.  How the heck can we render an opinion with the lack of information presented.  So far we know there's a ships ladder and a door.  That sounds damned strange to me too.

Here's a shits ladder I ran into last week.



The treads get progressivly smaller and the last two force you to turn your foot sideways.




The shits ladder faces the parapet.  The top of the parapet is a handhold to be used when exiting the scuttle.

I could describe it with words all day long and you may or may not understand the danger.  Two pictures made it clear.  The parapet was replaced like for like because it was rotten.  I wrote a correction to raise the parapet to 42" within 6' of the scuttle.  They called me today to tell me that the scuttle has been relocated.  Shits ladder and all.

Somebody find me a code for any of what I did.  It was a legal car wash for 38 years and an inspector didn't like it when he had to use it.  For that reason they moved the scuttle....and what's the odds that they didn't bust some code doing it.  I will see it tomorrow.

The inspector that doesn't like the ships ladder and a door may be in the same boat as me and nobody here knows whether that's the case or not.

Then again...oh my goodness...I might be another idiot and this is how I'm finding out.  I hate when that happens.


----------



## nitramnaed (Sep 23, 2016)

I'll see if I can get a picture.


----------



## ADAguy (Sep 23, 2016)

*203 General Exceptions

203.1 General. Sites, buildings, facilities, and elements are exempt from these requirements to the extent specified by 203.

203.4 Limited Access Spaces. *Spaces accessed only by ladders, catwalks, crawl spaces, or very narrow passageways shall not be required to comply with these requirements or to be on an accessible route.

*203.5 Machinery Spaces.* Spaces frequented only by service personnel for maintenance, repair, or occasional monitoring of equipment shall not be required to comply with these requirements or to be on an accessible route. Machinery spaces include, but are not limited to, elevator pits or elevator penthouses; mechanical, electrical or communications equipment rooms; piping or equipment catwalks; water or sewage treatment pump rooms and stations; electric substations and transformer vaults; and highway and tunnel utility facilities.


----------



## steveray (Sep 23, 2016)

The situations not covered by code are probably covered by OSHA....Tigers roof doesn't look like it is 16' up and might not even require a permanent ladder...Obviously there could be a stupid dangerous situation that we are not seeing in the OP, but it doesn't sound it.


----------



## Francis Vineyard (Sep 23, 2016)

To directly address the AHJ concerns will he accept an attached small enclosure for a windbreak?


----------



## linnrg (Sep 23, 2016)

ICE
what are all of the tubes or lines left of the scuttle that all run down surface of the roof?  Here in Alaska we never see much running across a roof


----------



## ICE (Sep 23, 2016)

linnrg said:


> ICE
> what are all of the tubes or lines left of the scuttle that all run down surface of the roof?  Here in Alaska we never see much running across a roof


It's a car wash....one of the hoses has new car smell.


----------



## linnrg (Sep 23, 2016)

thanks, I just went to you"average day" thread and saw better photos.  This would be a heck of a roof to have to re-roof with all that scattered about.  All concerns about where the scuttle is located is warranted.


----------

