# Stair violations?? or are they??



## righter101 (Aug 30, 2012)

Pictured is a set of stairs from a residential property to the beach.  Would you apply the "means of egress" requirements found in Ch 3 of the IRC?Yes/No/Maybe & Why/Why not.Thanks for the feedback.

View attachment 1708


View attachment 1708


/monthly_2012_08/572953e6b56ec_BeachStairs.jpg.8cf80b10e619c73e37c8b1dd8060bb05.jpg


----------



## mtlogcabin (Aug 30, 2012)

Yes

2009 IRC

R101.2 Scope.

The provisions of the International Residential Code for One- and Two-family Dwellings shall apply to the construction, alteration , movement, enlargement, replacement, repair, equipment, use and occupancy, location, removal and demolition of detached one- and two-family dwellings and townhouses not more than three stories above grade plane in height with a separate means of egress and their accessory structures .



STRUCTURE. That which is built or constructed.

STAIRWAY. One or more flights of stairs, either interior or exterior, with the necessary landings and platforms connecting them to form a continuous and uninterrupted passage from one level to another within or attached to a building, porch or deck.

Well You can't use the IRC so I guess you have to use the IBC

2009 IBC

101.2 Scope.

The provisions of this code shall apply to the construction, alteration , movement, enlargement, replacement, repair, equipment, use and occupancy, location, maintenance, removal and demolition of every building or structure or any appurtenances connected or attached to such buildings or structures.

STRUCTURE. That which is built or constructed.

STAIRWAY. One or more flights of stairs , either exterior or interior, with the necessary landings and platforms connecting them, to form a continuous and uninterrupted passage from one level to another.

Just because something is constructed on residential property does not require you to use the IRC exclusivly. Exterior stairs are covered under the IBC


----------



## Gregg Harris (Aug 30, 2012)

mtlogcabin said:
			
		

> Yes2009 IRC
> 
> R101.2 Scope.
> 
> ...


R311

Are all exits from a residents required to be a "means of egress"?


----------



## righter101 (Aug 30, 2012)

Thank you for the feedback.

I don't have my mind decided either way.  Wanted to get all opinions.

Assume we discard the IRC and elect to use the IBC, it would seem to fit under the scoping provisions and a clear definition of a stairway is found as you provided.

The rise/run, height, guard requirements, etc, are all found in Chapter 10, "Means of Egress".

1001.1 General. Buildings or portions thereof shall be provided

with a means of egress system as required by this chapter.

The provisions of this chapter shall control the design, construction

and arrangement of means of egress components

required to provide an approved means of egress from structures

and portions thereof.

Is a set of stairs accessing the beach considered a "portion therof"????


----------



## righter101 (Aug 30, 2012)

Is the stair "structure", it's own entity, which would require egress to and from it, as a "structure", and therefore CH 10 requirements could be applied??

My reading of the commentary would tend to favor that conclusion.


----------



## High Desert (Aug 30, 2012)

righter101 said:
			
		

> Is a set of stairs accessing the beach considered a "portion therof"????


I would only think it would apply as a means of egress if it were connected someway to a structure.


----------



## ICE (Aug 30, 2012)

No.  It is a landscapers project that would not require a permit.


----------



## Gregg Harris (Aug 30, 2012)

ICE said:
			
		

> No.  It is a landscapers project that would not require a permit.


This was my first thought looking at IBC 312 it is hard to tell from the picture but it looks like it starts on the property somewhere away from the house so I would not think that it would fall under a means of egress.


----------



## Francis Vineyard (Aug 30, 2012)

No . . . http://www.inspectpa.com/forum/showthread.php?4997-Exterior-Stairways-When-is-the-IRC-applicable-(and-not-applicable)

I suppose the beach if not a public way will eventually lead to it.  Did they need a permit for the retaining wall to build on the slope or is that landscaping?

Francis


----------



## ICE (Aug 30, 2012)

The picture is the size of an Excedrin tablet so it's hard to tell but I don't see a retaining wall.


----------



## Durant (Aug 30, 2012)

It's exempt per 2009 IRC: It's playground equipment and exempt according to R105.2 (8.).

What are you doing trespassing on their beach?


----------



## Builder Bob (Aug 31, 2012)

If the IBC is the code of choice, the stairs need landings installed............. In our area, this would lead to self sucicide if you started doing this on the beaches.

I don't think the IBC or the IRC really cover this application since the stairs are not a required means of egress...... but used for a convience to gain access to the beach for recreational purposes ------

However, Good workmanship and good practices would tend to follow the guidelines of the code.

If a building permit was issued, you are opening yourselves to alot of political and legal fallout as you are going to be darned if you do and darned if you don't. Most of these application in our region are covered by the OCRM regulations - and piers, docks, stairs, and beach access are regulated by this state agency. Our limits of responsibility stop at the OCRM line - Thank goodness


----------



## Francis Vineyard (Aug 31, 2012)

ICE said:
			
		

> The picture is the size of a matchbook so it's hard to tell but I don't see a retaining wall.


It looks like landscaping tiers under the stairs, however if one should enforce sections of this code then all of it as applicable to structures.

*“**R403.1.7 Footings on or adjacent to slopes. *The placement of buildings and structures on or adjacent to slopes steeper than one unit vertical in three units horizontal (33.3-percent slope) shall conform to Sections R403.1.7.1 through R403.1.7.4.”

Francis

​


----------



## Yankee (Aug 31, 2012)

If it is attached to a deck attached to the house, I use IRC. If it is attached to the house and is the egress path from primary egress to grade, it is IRC. Anything else is landscaping. don't know how it could possible fall under IBC unless this is a multifamily building.


----------



## globe trekker (Aug 31, 2012)

I vote "no" as well! Not a MOE to the public way and the stairs appear

to not be attached to the residence. OP says _"from a Residential_

_property". _ See Section R311.2.1  in the 2006 IRC,  _" ..shall be_

_positively anchored to the primary residence"._





.


----------



## fatboy (Aug 31, 2012)

I'm in the no camp....... looks like a landscape feature.......


----------



## righter101 (Aug 31, 2012)

ICE said:
			
		

> The picture is the size of a matchbook so it's hard to tell but I don't see a retaining wall.


I had to do that to get under the 19k posting limit.  If anyone knows a way around, I can repost a full size pic.

The stairs connect a portion of the yard to the beach below.  They are private, not public, but are nowhere near the house.


----------



## righter101 (Aug 31, 2012)

Durant said:
			
		

> It's exempt per 2009 IRC: It's playground equipment and exempt according to R105.2 (8.).What are you doing trespassing on their beach?


Something else you can't see from the picture is that the stairs were built over the property line.  Hence the need to tresspass...


----------



## High Desert (Aug 31, 2012)

Ditto to fatboy, globe and ICE.

Fatboy, looks like you got my favorite QB now. Suppose I have to be a Broncos fan now.


----------



## jj1289 (Aug 31, 2012)

NO here also


----------



## mtlogcabin (Aug 31, 2012)

If access to the beach area was designed using landscape materials then I would not have a problem. However the picture depicts a stair which the building codes give a design criteria for and if you want to permit and inspect the design and installation it can be done using the IBC.

A stair does not have to serve a means of egress to be regulated by the code it could be used to access different levels along a walking path. How many properties have exterior sidewalks and stairs that provide a path between building or around buildings that are not part of the means of egress? Schools come to mind do you allow them to construct whatever they want or do you require them to meat the design requirements of a stair as described in the "Means of Egress" portion of the code?

All I am saying is if you want to the IBC code provides a way. If you do not then stick with the IRC just be consistant in applying your decision throughout the jurisdiction.


----------



## righter101 (Aug 31, 2012)

jj1289 said:
			
		

> NO here also


This is sounding good.  I didn't want to get involved with regulating these.  They have to get a shoreline permit to add docks and stairs but we have never enforced any building code provisions.

BLINDERS -- ON.  Check.

Does anyone see anything wrong or a potential liability with providing "suggested" items such as hand rail specs??  Or just leave the building department out of it entirely.??

What is with the football talk??

There are only two real sports... Mixed Martial Arts and Poker !!!!!!


----------



## David Henderson (Aug 31, 2012)

I vote no also


----------



## globe trekker (Aug 31, 2012)

righter101,

In your jurisdiction, who typically builds and maintains these stairs?

IMO, if you have the option, leave them alone! Do not suggest

anything! "Zip it  &  skip it!"    Also, what is the position of your

AHJ attorney?

.


----------



## righter101 (Aug 31, 2012)

globe trekker said:
			
		

> righter101,In your jurisdiction, who typically builds and maintains these stairs?
> 
> IMO, if you have the option, leave them alone! Do not suggest
> 
> ...


Usually built and maintained by homeowner or contractor.  I will run it by the attorney.

I do understand the "not suggesting anything" approach as well.  We either regulate them or we don't.

Thanks for the good feedback from everyone.


----------



## fatboy (Aug 31, 2012)

Go Manning........Go Broncos!

Stick with IRC, not part of the required exiting from the structure.


----------



## ICE (Aug 31, 2012)

globe trekker said:
			
		

> righter101,In your jurisdiction, who typically builds and maintains these stairs?
> 
> IMO, if you have the option, leave them alone! Do not suggest
> 
> ...


----------



## TheCommish (Aug 31, 2012)

righter101 said:
			
		

> I had to do that to get under the 19k posting limit.  If anyone knows a way around, I can repost a full size pic.The stairs connect a portion of the yard to the beach below.  They are private, not public, but are nowhere near the house.


set up a photo bucket account, upload the photo, select the photo, in the lower right corner are some share choices, left click on IMG code, the box will turn yellow with the word copied, paste that into the reply box, it will look like this with square brackets before and after


----------



## Daddy-0- (Aug 31, 2012)

No here also unless the stairs are associated with a dock permit in which case game on. I like the playground approach.


----------



## Durant (Sep 1, 2012)

ICC screwed up the the stairways code requirement by placing it in the 2003 IRC under "Means of Egress".  In the 2000 IRC, if it was a stairway regardless of it's location it was required to meet the code requirements.

For the most part, most state and local governments adopt the I-codes blindly


----------



## Rider Rick (Sep 1, 2012)

Put it under the Owner/Builder permit and leave at that.

It is San Juan County isn't it?


----------



## Yankee (Sep 3, 2012)

Durant said:
			
		

> ICC screwed up the the stairways code requirement by placing it in the 2003 IRC under "Means of Egress".  In the 2000 IRC, if it was a stairway regardless of it's location it was required to meet the code requirements.For the most part, most state and local governments adopt the I-codes blindly


I agree  and there is language to support that ALL stairs in a dwelling or from a dwelling to the ground are covered by the stair criteria (don't have my book handy to reference sections), however once one is to grade, I no longer consider built stairs as being in my jurisdiction for single familyresidential


----------



## darcar (Sep 4, 2012)

agreed.... Landscaping no enforcement

disagree... Boo Manning... GO STEELERS!!!


----------



## Papio Bldg Dept (Sep 4, 2012)

I understand the general theme here, and personally I agree, however, an arguement could made for compliance by loosely using 102.1 or 105.2.  Maybe the square footage exceeds 120 square feet (> 40 lineal feet of stairs and landings)?

Either way, as mtlogcabin stated, be consistent.

If you are going to exempt it, then you might consider adding such structures to your work exempt from permit section (2006: 105.2).


----------



## Papio Bldg Dept (Sep 4, 2012)

p.s., in our AHJ, we require permits on any detached accessory structure over 6 feet tall.  Stairs aren't required in detached accessory structures, but when they are provided, they shall comply with R311.5.


----------



## righter101 (Sep 4, 2012)

Rider Rick said:
			
		

> Put it under the Owner/Builder permit and leave at that.It is San Juan County isn't it?


It is SJC but stairs are one of the few items regulated under the OB ordinance (at least handrails and landings).


----------



## Big Mac (Sep 6, 2012)

Regardless of whether a permit is required, the project is required to meet code provisions.

The stairway is most certainly a structure.  (i.e. that which is built or constructed)

Exemption from permit requirements of this code shall not be deemed to grant authorization for any work to be done in a manner in violation of the provisions of this code or any other law or ordinances of this jurisdiction.  2009 IRC, Section R105.2.

I am quite sure this language has not changed from recent codes.


----------

