• Welcome to The Building Code Forum

    Your premier resource for building code knowledge.

    This forum remains free to the public thanks to the generous support of our Sawhorse Members and Corporate Sponsors. Their contributions help keep this community thriving and accessible.

    Want enhanced access to expert discussions and exclusive features? Learn more about the benefits here.

    Ready to upgrade? Log in and upgrade now.

Multi-story decorative stairs code requirements

  • Thread starter Thread starter YonLL
  • Start date Start date
  • Featured
Y

YonLL

REGISTERED
Joined
Aug 7, 2025
Messages
8
Location
New York City
My understanding for stairs has been that whether it is used as one of the required means of egress or not, it needs to follow the safety requirements for riser/tread, railings etc. listed in Chapter 10.

See this project in new york city: https://www.selldorf.com/projects/david-zwirner-20th-street

This is an open stairs and not used for egress. Still, I don't see any handrails? Did I miss something?
1754578837570.png

Thank you,
 
RLGA said:
You didn't miss anything, but the architect of this project sure did.
Click to expand...
What I didn't understand and started second-guessing myself was that the stair was a featured design for the building, and also done by an esteemed architect...
 
YonLL said:
What I didn't understand and started second-guessing myself was that the stair was a featured design for the building, and also done by an esteemed architect...
Click to expand...

Speaking as an architect ... that's the problem.

Too many "esteemed" architects don't care about codes. They see themselves as "form givers," not as the master builders that Renaissance architects were. Codes are beneath them.

For example, Cesar Pelli is considered to be a world-class architect. At one time he was named Dean of the Yale School of Architecture, so he and his office moved to New Haven, Connecticut. While he was Dean, Pelli maintained his private design practice. All he designed was the exteriors of the buildings. His firm did NO construction documents -- he farmed that out to a couple or three local New haven firms, who prepared and signed and sealed the actual construction documents. But the projects all had Pelli's name on them when they were published.

I once raised a code issue with a principal of the firm I was then working for. His response? "I've never understood that section of the code, so I don't think it applies to me."

And that's the attitude of too many architects. As a code official, I routinely have architects bitch and moan when I reject their plans, even though my plan reviews cit the applicable sections of the code. I've had more than one tell me outright that I have "no right" to question their drawings, because they signed and sealed them.
 
YonLL said:
and not used for egress
Click to expand...
If the stairs are in the exit access they are used for egress.

I find it hard to believe that the architect, plans reviewer, contractor, and inspector missed handrails. A building owner would be exposing themselves to too much liability to not put in handrails, same with the architect. Honestly, the lighting looks a little odd, depth of field is also pretty deep, there’s a chance this is a well-crafted computer-generated rendering. Plus the exterior view of the building looks odd, no address number or Knox box - website gives acknowledgement to a photographer, however.
 
It's possible that they took this picture before final inspection, they may have had them on the plans and just wanted to get the pretty photo before they were installed.
 
walker.t said:
I find it hard to believe that the architect, plans reviewer, contractor, and inspector missed handrails.
Click to expand...
Me too, especially when it was presented as one of the "highlights" of the building. I can't help but think there was some form of agreement or exception granted by the city to allow this to happen....
Unfortunately, I can confirm those are not renderings or pre-CO photos. It looks like the gallery is closed now for some reason, but you can find photographs of these stairs by the visitors on tripadvisor.
 
YonLL said:
What I didn't understand and started second-guessing myself was that the stair was a featured design for the building, and also done by an esteemed architect...
Click to expand...
"Esteemed Architects" make things look pretty. They're very good at that part of their job. However, in my experience, they rarely follow code and often have ego issues.

I worked for a guy a couple of years ago who thought himself some god-tier architect. He designed very nice homes, far nicer than anything I could think up. But the number of times I had to tell him "dude, you can't do that because code" was staggering. It's like every single project was in its own little universe, divorced from the lessons learned during previous project. He would say things like "this jurisdiction doesn't check that," or, "if we get a comment, we'll address it then." He seemed to think that code only mattered if he was caught not following it, which seems to be very common with architects and designers now...
 
When I was in college, we had a world-renowned architect from Mexico as a guest speaker. He showed a house with a very elegant stair, like something from a James Bond lair: no guardrail, no handrail, no closed risers. It looked beautiful.
At one point, someone asked, "do you have codes that require handrails?", to which he replied: "In Mexico, we prefer to teach people how to go up and down stairs."
 
Okay, it looks like we unanimously agreed that the stairs are not in compliance with code. It was appalling to me who always try to do things by the book, how some buildings can just not comply. It looks like the owner of the gallery has these kinds of stairs in all their buildings so I bet they found a way around it.
 
mtlogcabin said:

Multi-story decorative stairs code​

There is no such thing as a decorative stair
Click to expand...
Yeah, I meant the code constraints for decorative stairs, meaning stairs used mainly for aesthetics and not for egress, but the question was mainly on how the project I mentioned got away with not having to comply.
 
mtlogcabin said:

Multi-story decorative stairs code​

There is no such thing as a decorative stair
Click to expand...
Probably more accurate to say there’s no such thing as a purely decorative stair… though they occur often on theater / performance stage sets, landscape follies, etc.
But other than that, on 99.99% of stairs I would agree.
IMG_6184.jpeg
 
If a portion of the stair can be occupied - meaning and occupant can use them - the rest of the stair is a required means of egress.
 
bill1952 said:
If a portion of the stair can be occupied - meaning and occupant can use them - the rest of the stair is a required means of egress.
Click to expand...
Not so fast....

[BG]OCCUPIABLE SPACE. A room or enclosed space designed for human occupancy in which individuals congregate for amusement, educational or similar purposes or in which occupants are engaged at labor, and which is equipped with means of egress and light and ventilation facilities meeting the requirements of this code.
 
@bill1952, under that logic, if other components that are listed in chapter 10 are provided on a site, do those become a required means of egress?
Example: An assembly room is required to have 2 separate exits to an exterior yard. Design provides for 2 separate swinging exit doors at opposite ends of the room, but it also has a 3rd door opening that is a sliding glass door. This SGD is not needed to meet occupant load exit requirements. Does it become a required means of egress simply because it exists there?

YonLL said:
My understanding for stairs has been that whether it is used as one of the required means of egress or not, it needs to follow the safety requirements for riser/tread, railings etc. listed in Chapter 10.
Click to expand...

I think in context of the original post, we are conflating minimum exit code requirements with property liability law, and perhaps the discussion is more analogous to a decorative stair being an "attractive nuisance".
 
So you are maintaing a building is not required to have a means of egress from a stair? And a stair which is not needed to comply with the MOE requirements can be any length despite travel distance and common path of travel requirements? You can add a stair of any design in a building that otherwise complies with the code, because the stair can't be considered occupied?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top