guard height R-2

[hans@dha-architects.]

I've got an apartment building going up each with their own porch, building is three stories high, for the guard height under exception #1, it says if within the individual dwelling unit in R2 with separate means of egress, height can be 36" - I feel silly asking this, but what do they mean by "separate means of egress" ?

 

[e hilton]

The porch is not the only exit path.

 

[hans@dha-architects.]

Now I do feel silly! That makes sense….I was thinking each dwelling had it’s own egress but that wouldn’t make sense….thanks for clarifying

 

[steveray]

Basically decided if it is like a house/ IRC structure ( you live there and 3 stories or less) you get to use "house" guards...But yeah, fuzzy wording...

 

[bill1952]

I thought separate meant serving only one dwelling unit, same as IRC.

 

[hans@dha-architects.]

I thought separate meant serving only one dwelling unit, same as IRC.

that was my thinking, but R-2 would typically have common exits being apartments, hence my confusion (of course not sure why it really matters if it is or isn't the only means of egress to determine height)

 

[bill1952]

that was my thinking, but R-2 would typically have common exits being apartments, hence my confusion (of course not sure why it really matters if it is or isn't the only means of egress to determine height)

Common from an entry to apartment, but if apartment is multi story, m.o.e. starts at point furthest from that entry.

I'm probably missing something....

 

[ICE]

California Building Code:
1015.3 Height. Required guards shall be not less than 42 inches (1067 mm) high, measured vertically as follows: blah, blah, blah

Exceptions:
1. For occupancies in Group R-3, and within individual dwelling units in occupancies in Group R-2, guards on the open sides of stairs shall have a height not less than 34 inches (864 mm) measured vertically from a line connecting the leading edges of the treads.

2. For occupancies in Group R-3, and within individual dwelling units in occupancies in Group R-2, where the top of the guard serves as a handrail on the open sides of stairs, the top of the guard shall be not less than 34 inches (864 mm) and not more than 38 inches (965 mm) measured vertically from a line connecting the leading edges of the treads.

California Residential Code:
R312.1.2 Height. Required guards at open-sided walking surfaces, including stairs, porches, balconies or landings, shall be not less than 42 inches (1067 mm) in height as measured vertically above the adjacent walking surface or the line connecting the nosings.

Exceptions:

1. Guards on the open sides of stairs shall have a height of not less than 34 inches (864 mm) measured vertically from a line connecting the nosings.
2. Where the top of the guard serves as a handrail on the open sides of stairs, the top of the guard shall be not less than 34 inches (864 mm) and not more than 38 inches (965 mm) as measured vertically from a line connecting the nosings.

A required porch guard, if located in California, shall be not less than 42" high.

 

[hans@dha-architects.]

Common from an entry to apartment, but if apartment is multi story, m.o.e. starts at point furthest from that entry.

I'm probably missing something....

right, but not really looking for definition of MOE in relation to multi-story, just what exactly "separate MOE" means in the exception - the building has two exit stairs and bedroom egress windows (although not required with two exits), so maybe I answered my own question in that I do have separate means of egress and hence can have 36" high guards

 

[hans@dha-architects.]

California Building Code:
1015.3 Height. Required guards shall be not less than 42 inches (1067 mm) high, measured vertically as follows: blah, blah, blah

Exceptions:
1. For occupancies in Group R-3, and within individual dwelling units in occupancies in Group R-2, guards on the open sides of stairs shall have a height not less than 34 inches (864 mm) measured vertically from a line connecting the leading edges of the treads.

2. For occupancies in Group R-3, and within individual dwelling units in occupancies in Group R-2, where the top of the guard serves as a handrail on the open sides of stairs, the top of the guard shall be not less than 34 inches (864 mm) and not more than 38 inches (965 mm) measured vertically from a line connecting the leading edges of the treads.

California Residential Code:
R312.1.2 Height. Required guards at open-sided walking surfaces, including stairs, porches, balconies or landings, shall be not less than 42 inches (1067 mm) in height as measured vertically above the adjacent walking surface or the line connecting the nosings.

Exceptions:

1. Guards on the open sides of stairs shall have a height of not less than 34 inches (864 mm) measured vertically from a line connecting the nosings.
2. Where the top of the guard serves as a handrail on the open sides of stairs, the top of the guard shall be not less than 34 inches (864 mm) and not more than 38 inches (965 mm) as measured vertically from a line connecting the nosings.

A required porch guard, if located in California, shall be not less than 42" high.

funny, your IBC doesn't have the exception we have in CT, your exceptions #1/2 are our #2/3 - our #1 allows 36" in R2/3 three stories and under as long as R2 has the separate MOE, our IRC only requires 36"

 

[bill1952]

right, but not really looking for definition of MOE in relation to multi-story, just what exactly "separate MOE" means in the exception - the building has two exit stairs and bedroom egress windows (although not required with two exits), so maybe I answered my own question in that I do have separate means of egress and hence can have 36" high guards

I still think "separate" means serving just one dwelling.

 

[ICE]

funny, your IBC doesn't have the exception we have in CT, your exceptions #1/2 are our #2/3 - our #1 allows 36" in R2/3 three stories and under as long as R2 has the separate MOE, our IRC only requires 36"

It is not clear to me what the MOE has to do with the height of a guard. Can you copy and paste the CT code? What year edition is the CT code?

 

[hans@dha-architects.]

I still think "separate" means serving just one dwelling.

I don't know - a three story apartment building with dwelling units having their own MOE, from the 3rd floor? - that would seem unlikely. why would the R3 occupancy with same three story restriction not require the separate MOE?

 

[hans@dha-architects.]

It is not clear to me what the MOE has to do with the height of a guard. Can you copy and paste the CT code? What year edition is the CT code?

 

[hans@dha-architects.]

It is not clear to me what the MOE has to do with the height of a guard. Can you copy and paste the CT code? What year edition is the CT code?

it's the latest 2021 IBC, but was the same in the previous edition as well

 

[ICE]

So CT. code starts out with 42" high guards and drops to 36" if there is three stories or less and in the case of R2 a separate MOE. I Suppose that there's a reason for that but I fail to see a connection.

Hopefully, some of the brilliant minds here can clear that up.

 

[steveray]

(Amd) 1015.3 Height. Required guards shall be not less than 42 inches (1067 mm) high, measured
vertically as follows:
1. From the adjacent walking surfaces.
2. On stairways and stepped aisles, from the line connecting the leading edges of the tread nosings.
3. On ramps and ramped aisles, from the ramp surface at the guard.
Exceptions:
1. For occupancies in Group R-3 not more than three stories above grade in height, and within
individual dwelling units in occupancies in Group R-2 not more than three stories above grade in
height with separate means of egress, required guards shall be not less than 36 inches (914 mm)
in height measured vertically above the adjacent walking surfaces.
2. For occupancies in Group R-3, and within individual dwelling units in occupancies in Group R-2,
guards on the open sides of stairs shall have a height not less than 34 inches (864 mm) measured
vertically from a line connecting the leading edges of the treads.
3. For occupancies in Group R-1 bed and breakfast establishments, Group R-3, and within individual
dwelling units in occupancies in Group R-2, where the top of the guard also serves as a handrail
on the open sides of stairs, the top of the guard shall be not less than 34 inches (864 mm) and not
more than 38 inches (965 mm) measured vertically from a line connecting the leading edges of the
treads.
4. For occupancies in Group R-1 bed and breakfast establishments, level guards shall be not less
than 36 inches (914 mm) high, measured vertically above the adjacent walking surface.
5. The guard height in assembly seating areas shall comply with Section 1030.17 as applicable.
6. Along alternating tread devices and ship ladders, guards whose top rail also serves as a handrail,
shall have height not less than 30 inches (762 mm) and not more than 34 inches (864 mm),
measured vertically from the leading edge of the device tread nosing.
7. In Group F occupancies where exit access stairways serve fewer than three stories and such
stairways are not open to the public, and where the top of the guard also serves as a handrail, the
top of the guard shall be not less than 34 inches (864 mm) and not more than 38 inches (965 mm)
measured vertically from a line connecting the leading edges of the treads.

 

[bill1952]

Read it without the phrases I show in parenthesis and I think it's clear that "separate" means serving only that one individual dwelling unit


"....individual dwelling units (in occupancies in Group R-2 not more than three stories above grade in
height) with separate means of egress..."

If ICC had a manual if style like NFPA requiring only one requirement in a section, we wouldn't have these issues. As best I can tell, ICC has no manual of style or any guidelines as to how the documents are written.

 

[north star]

% ~ %

Bill, ...the ICC provides publishes Commentaries to hopefully explain
some of the reasoning for the final, published editions.

Also, IMO, ...36" is much too low for a guard.

% ~ %

 

[ICE]

36" is much too low for a guard.

Especially for top heavy people like fatboy.

 

[bill1952]

% ~ %

Bill, ...the ICC provides publishes Commentaries to hopefully explain
some of the reasoning for the final, published editions.

Also, IMO, ...36" is much too low for a guard.

% ~ %

Not debating height. It's about "separate means of egress" meaning.

Commentaries are not code, just opinions of staff, who are not experts on all things.

36" is same as IRC. Depending on location, I have recommended guards higher than 42".

 

[tbz]

1st and foremost the CBC does not use the model IRC for Guard height, its the only state in the USA that requires all guards on open sided floors or balconies to be 42 inches high period. The only exception is on stair flights within a dwelling unit.

So, ICE not understanding what the other 49 states do allow, I get. ;>)

As to the R-2 and separate means of egress, it is simple.

There are parts of the country were they build stacked 2 story condos. Hence the first 2 floors, less than 3 stories, all have their own entrance to the public way and is not shared, then on top of that, there continues to be condos, built lets say going up another 10 stories.

Hence the 2 story street level units with the separate entrance, not sharing M.O.E. are allowed to take advantage of the IRC guard height of 36".

The unit is no different than a townhouse 3 stories or less, for the owners or tenants, except for those above 3 stories.

 

[Joe.B]

View attachment 10494

Hey I think there's an important element of this that doesn't fit with your original description. It sounded to me like you're asking about guards on an exterior porch. The exception your stating say "within individual dwelling units", maybe I'm being to picky, but I'd say that only applies to guards inside the dwelling, not on an exterior porch.

 

[hans@dha-architects.]

Hey I think there's an important element of this that doesn't fit with your original description. It sounded to me like you're asking about guards on an exterior porch. The exception your stating say "within individual dwelling units", maybe I'm being to picky, but I'd say that only applies to guards inside the dwelling, not on an exterior porch.

well the porch is part of the dwelling unit, no? (they're individual porches only accessible from within the unit), I think it can obviously be interpreted both ways