• Welcome to the new and improved Building Code Forum. We appreciate you being here and hope that you are getting the information that you need concerning all codes of the building trades. This is a free forum to the public due to the generosity of the Sawhorses, Corporate Supporters and Supporters who have upgraded their accounts. If you would like to have improved access to the forum please upgrade to Sawhorse by first logging in then clicking here: Upgrades

Stairs vs Means of Egress Stairs

Jim B

Silver Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2010
Messages
107
Location
Pennsylvania
I am dealing with a project under the IBC 2009

My question is, are ALL stairs required to comply with Chapter 10 or only mean of egress stairs?

It seems that whens something is specific to a “means of egress" components, it is specified in that section. For example, doors specific “means of egress doors” or ramps specify “ramps used for components of means of egress”.

Stair section in IBC 2009; 1009 never states means of egress stairs.
 
If it is a stair...it goes under 1009....if it were allowed to be a ladder or something less than and they put something that looks more like a stairway in...I have no issue with not requiring full "stair" compliance...If that makes any sense...
 
My question is, are ALL stairs required to comply with Chapter 10
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 .

1009 provides many exceptions for specific instances
 
I concur with the folks above, unless you can consider it otherwise, a stair is a stair..............must comply..........
 
That's why I like the 2012 IBC...they added the following in Section 1009.1: "Stairways serving occupied portions of a building shall comply with the requirements of this section."

There is no reference to stairs only used for means of egress.
 
They should have just added language like they did in doors.......No?

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. ********Doors provided for egress purposes in numbers greater than required by this code shall meet the requirements of this section.******
 
Isn't it correct that not all stairs are part of a required exit; for example exterior stairs that are not an exit component of a means of egress in accordance with section 1027 and equipment platforms although these stairs shall conform to section 1009?

By the way this project is not about a non-required stairway to an attic is it?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
"unless you can consider it otherwise, a stair is a stair"

If other sections of code apply, go there, otherwise...........
 
Francis, no it's not about an attic stair.

RGLA, the info on the IBC 2012 seems to solidify my concept that not just "means of egress" shall comply

Thanks to all the replies
 
Every step you take; every breath you take; someone's watching you.

When you are in a structure, building, edifice, room, space, compartment, you are within an element of the means of egress;

one element or another, common path, access, exit or discharge, so if you must move your body vertically or horizontally you must comply with the elements of chapter 10 until safely discharged.
 
Just remember that if you are providing in excess of the required number of "anything" differentiating from required vs non-compliant extras may still be a slippery slope to traverse.
 
There was a time when chapter ten dealt with only the required means of egress. The first sentence of chapter 10 made that clear.

I remember a case where a lady fell on steps leading from a business. A crook...sorry about that, I meant a lawyer sued the business owner claiming that the steps did not comply with the code. A guy named Marvin convinced a jury that because the exit and it's steps were not a required exit, there was no code that applied. Marvin could be a bit of a whore that way.

Nobody, including Marvin, considered that as anything more than a loophole.
 
ICE said:
There was a time when chapter ten dealt with only the required means of egress. The first sentence of chapter 10 made that clear. I remember a case where a lady fell on steps leading from a business. A crook...sorry about that, I meant a lawyer sued the business owner claiming that the steps did not comply with the code. A guy named Marvin convinced a jury that because the exit and it's steps were not a required exit, there was no code that applied. Marvin could be a bit of a whore that way.

Nobody, including Marvin, considered that as anything more than a loophole.
I would consider code officials who require more than minimum code to be in a similar category.
 
kilitact said:
I would consider code officials who require more than minimum code to be in a similar category.
That's a first for me.

Whore:

debase oneself by doing something for unworthy motives, typically to make money.
I don't do it for money. Marvin did.
 
Went through this a few years back. Ended up calling ICC. Sure enough any and all stairs fall under chapter 10 regardless.
 
rktect 1 said:
Went through this a few years back. Ended up calling ICC. Sure enough any and all stairs fall under chapter 10 regardless.
Be interested in their current response (position) with the 2012 IBC change(s) to this section.
 
Top