2406.3(10)

[Francis Vineyard]

It seems the risk is higher at the bottom of the stairs than the top for falling or losing balance. Yet literal reading of the code would require a larger area for safety glazing at the top of the stairs than the bottom.

Do you require safety glazing at the top of stairs per 2406.3(10)?

If not how do you interpret the code regarding the top landing?

 

[RJJ]

Frances That is a good ? However, Is not the potential for a fall j the same at the top as it is at the bottom. How about in mid span? I need to read that section closely. I will be back on this. 06 or 09 code?

 

[Plans Approver]

I think reading 2406.3(10) in conjunction with 2406.3(11) will yield a greater hazardous area at the bottom. (Same language in 06 & 09).(10) 36" horizontally (only) and 60" above walking surface.(11) 60" horizontally in any direction from bottom tread (before the landing or lower floor) and 60" plus riser height above walking surface.

View attachment 146

View attachment 146

/monthly_2010_06/2406_3-10-11..jpg.1b9475fd20e56e16cd48bcf5551731a0.jpg

 

[Francis Vineyard]

2006 edition;

Summarizing 1009.1 & 1009.4 There shall be a floor or landing at the top and bottom of each stairway and every landing shall have a minimum dimension measured in the direction of travel equal to the width of the stairway, but not exceeding 48 inches.

It seems to me if the top landing is 48 inches it would require safety glazing within 7 ft. from the top tread nosing in the direction of travel i.e. ascending the stairs.

 

[peach]

take it to IRC 308.4 #10...

I just had this...window at the top of the landing was not changed with the renovation.. OK.. but the pull down stairs to the attic land within 2 feet of the window. Not tempered.

 

[Plans Approver]

I misinterpreted your question and "mis-drawed" the illustration. (It was late).The minimum length of any landing is the width of the stair. The length of the landing is the actual length of the landing. 1009.4 permits limiting the length of a landing to 48" for a straight run of stairs which may be wider than 4'-0". So the landings in a 5'-0" wide stair can be 48" rather than 60". If the landing is designed to be 10'-0" long then it's length is 10'-0".Back to the original posting. (I'm a visual person.) The illustration below illustrates the concepts of 2406.3(10) & (11) and their exception. The 36" is measured horizontally parallel to the walking surface and applies to the entire length of landings and stairs, straight, and other sides if curved, 90 degrees or doglegged, etc. The 5'-0" in (11) widens the area at the bottom tread, because most people fall down stairs. If the bottom or intermediate landing is greater than 5'-0" long then (10) kicks back in. If there is a guard (1013) between the stairway walking surface and the glazing then safety glazing is not required unless it is closer than 18".

View attachment 147

View attachment 147

/monthly_2010_06/572953b73c28a_2406_3-10-11Correcamp.jpg.526e7ee3a08cbc1702cd1a9f5559380f.jpg

 

[Francis Vineyard]

Dan your visuals are fantastic, wish I could do the same to pose my question more clearly. I'm only concern with the floor or landing at the top of the stairs. This article shows the area I'm concerned with regarding the interpretation at the top of the stairs;

http://www.deckmagazine.com/article/54.html

And page 5 of this handout similar to your drawing does not explain how they interpret the language of the code about the landing at the top of the stairs; http://www.ci.maple-grove.mn.us/filestorage/229/481/SAFETY_GLAZING.pdf

 

[mtlogcabin]

Francis

A landing is a walking surface I believe the deck magazine article example is correct and the Maple Grove example is not correct for a window at the top of the stairs.

Although I could not find a definition of a "walking surface" I did find where a landing is referred to as a "walking surface"

1009.5.1 Stairway walking surface.

The walking surface of treads and landings of a stairway shall not be sloped steeper than one unit vertical in 48 units horizontal (2-percent slope) in any direction. Stairway treads and landings shall have a solid surface. Finish floor surfaces shall be securely attached.

 

[Plans Approver]

Let's back track to your previous post:

Summarizing 1009.1 & 1009.4 There shall be a floor or landing at the top and bottom of each stairway and every landing shall have a minimum dimension measured in the direction of travel equal to the width of the stairway, but not exceeding 48 inches.

A landing at the top (or bottom) of the stairway is not required (unless the stairway is enclosed). The stairway may begin (or end) at a floor. That, I think, is the basis for the Maple Grove illustration. The deck article shows the top as a landing w/ the 36" reach. Both may be correct interpretations, the Maple Grove interp more liberal that the other.

I guess your real question was who decides whether it's a landing or a floor?

 

[Francis Vineyard]

Dan, exactly! I'm not sure if the code is making this distinction between a floor and a landing both being a walking surface and how is that distinction made so that it’s consistent in applying the code.

 

[texasbo]

I guess your real question was who decides whether it's a landing or a floor?

As others have said, the width of the stair determines what part is a landing and what part is just a floor. I also think the deck article is accurate.

 

[Plans Approver]

Just to be contrary.

Any open stair such as the exceptions in IBC 1020.1, residential, supplementary, and deck stairs don't require landings. Intermediate landings, enclosed stairway landings and landings where doors swing over are excepted. If the designer says the stair ends at a floor then it's a floor. If the designer says the stair ends at a landing then it's a landing. Our job is code compliance both conditions comply w/ IBC 1009.4 and IRC 311.5.4.1. I'd like to find a basis for requiring a landing, but can't. Anybody?

View attachment 346 Bueller? Bueller?

 

[texasbo]

I have to be misunderstanding. Are you saying the designer can designate a "floor" 2' wide at the top of a 4' wide stair?

Just to be contrary. Any open stair such as the exceptions in IBC 1020.1, residential, supplementary, and deck stairs don't require landings. Intermediate landings, enclosed stairway landings and landings where doors swing over are excepted. If the designer says the stair ends at a floor then it's a floor. If the designer says the stair ends at a landing then it's a landing. Our job is code compliance both conditions comply w/ IBC 1009.4 and IRC 311.5.4.1. I'd like to find a basis for requiring a landing, but can't. Anybody?

View attachment 346 Bueller? Bueller?

 

[TJacobs]

My view of the "landing" is it is the floor area designated as the beginning or end of a flight of stairs. The landing is different in the IBC and IRC.

IBC and IRC states the landing width is not less than the width of the stair, but the IBC also requires the landing to be at least the same as the stairway width in depth (max. of 48" for a straight run), where the IRC says the depth shall be a minimum of 36". So whereas the minimum landing for an 8' wide monumental stair in the IBC could be 8' d x 8' w, the same monumental stair minimum landing could be 3' d x 8' w in the IRC.

The Deck Builder diagram entitled "Safety Glazing Required Near Stairs" is incorrect at the top of the stair, as I think it extends too far beyond the stair (for a 36" stair width). The Maple Grove diagram may be correct for the Minnesota version, but for the unamended IRC, it needs to extend 36" beyond the edge of the top landing instead of stopping at the landing nosing.

 

[texasbo]

My view of the "landing" is it is the floor area designated as the beginning or end of a flight of stairs.

Yes, but if I'm understanding Plans Approver correctly, if the designer calls it a floor and not a landing, then all bets are off.

After rereading 2406.3 (10), I too agree that the deck builder diagram is incorrect, however.

 

[Plans Approver]

texasbo I have to be misunderstanding. Are you saying the designer can designate a "floor" 2' wide at the top of a 4' wide stair?

What I am asking is what code section says a landing is required at the top or bottom of a stairway (other than intermediate landings, enclosed stairway landings and landings where doors swing over). I can't find one in IBC or IRC.

A floor 2' wide could only be for an equipment area, since it is less than minimum egress width. So yes, a 4' wide stair could end at a 2' wide floor. I don't like it. But, under what auspices can we enforce our better than code judgment?

 

[texasbo]

You're playing games, so I will too. What specific code section says a 2' wide "floor" is a violation of egress width? Also, please point out the specific code section that says the designer gets to specify whether the space at the top of a stair is a floor or landing.

So instead of continuing to play jailhouse lawyer, here is my answer: if a designer places a 36" deep landing at the end of a 48" wide stair, and tries to play games with me saying it's not a landing, but a "floor', I'll throw him and his design out the door and ask him where the code says he gets to choose. I'll quote him 106.3.1 Examination of Documents, and the sentence that reads that the "building official...shall ascertain ...whether the construction...is in accordance with the requirements of this code...". That means that I, not he, gets to designate whether it's a floor or landing.

What I am asking is what code section says a landing is required at the top or bottom of a stairway (other than intermediate landings, enclosed stairway landings and landings where doors swing over). I can't find one in IBC or IRC.A floor 2' wide could only be for an equipment area, since it is less than minimum egress width. So yes, a 4' wide stair could end at a 2' wide floor. I don't like it. But, under what auspices can we enforce our better than code judgment?

 

[Plans Approver]

texasbo You're playing games, so I will too. Where does the code say a 2' wide "floor" is a violation of egress width?

I am NOT playing games and I don't want to. Using examples with 2' wide floors might be considered playing games.

The serious question is what code sections require landings at the top and bottom of stairways, other than those exceptions I mentioned?

Let's get back on topic.

edit: You posted before I did. Now I understand your position. We have laws that require the citing of code section if there is a violation. We don't use Chapter 1 of IBC. It is rewritten to conform with law including vested rights. When the code says "or" either may be used.

 

[TJacobs]

What I am asking is what code section says a landing is required at the top or bottom of a stairway (other than intermediate landings, enclosed stairway landings and landings where doors swing over). I can't find one in IBC or IRC.A floor 2' wide could only be for an equipment area, since it is less than minimum egress width. So yes, a 4' wide stair could end at a 2' wide floor. I don't like it. But, under what auspices can we enforce our better than code judgment?

The headings of the code sections below speak for themselves. I could be wrong...

1009.4 Stairway landings.

There shall be a floor or landing at the top and bottom of each stairway. The width of landings shall not be less than the width of stairways they serve. Every landing shall have a minimum dimension measured in the direction of travel equal to the width of the stairway. Such dimension need not exceed 48 inches (1219 mm) where the stairway has a straight run.

Exceptions:

1. Aisle stairs complying with Section 1025.

2. Doors opening onto a landing shall not reduce the landing to less than one-half the required width. When fully open, the door shall not project more than 7 inches (178 mm) into a landing.

R311.5.4 Landings for stairways.

There shall be a floor or landing at the top and bottom of each stairway.

Exception: A floor or landing is not required at the top of an interior flight of stairs, including stairs in an enclosed garage, provided a door does not swing over the stairs.

A flight of stairs shall not have a vertical rise larger than 12 feet (3658 mm) between floor levels or landings.

The width of each landing shall not be less than the width of the stairway served. Every landing shall have a minimum dimension of 36 inches (914 mm) measured in the direction of travel.

 

[texasbo]

TJacobs, you're having trouble even comprehending the concept Dan is trying to convey just like I did. What he's saying, is that because the "or" is in there, the designer can call it a "floor" and it wouldn't have to comply with the requirements for a landing.

The headings of the code sections below speak for themselves. I could be wrong...1009.4 Stairway landings.

There shall be a floor or landing at the top and bottom of each stairway. The width of landings shall not be less than the width of stairways they serve. Every landing shall have a minimum dimension measured in the direction of travel equal to the width of the stairway. Such dimension need not exceed 48 inches (1219 mm) where the stairway has a straight run.

Exceptions:

1. Aisle stairs complying with Section 1025.

2. Doors opening onto a landing shall not reduce the landing to less than one-half the required width. When fully open, the door shall not project more than 7 inches (178 mm) into a landing.

R311.5.4 Landings for stairways.

There shall be a floor or landing at the top and bottom of each stairway.

Exception: A floor or landing is not required at the top of an interior flight of stairs, including stairs in an enclosed garage, provided a door does not swing over the stairs.

A flight of stairs shall not have a vertical rise larger than 12 feet (3658 mm) between floor levels or landings.

The width of each landing shall not be less than the width of the stairway served. Every landing shall have a minimum dimension of 36 inches (914 mm) measured in the direction of travel.

 

[TJacobs]

Why would anybody think a landing needs certain dimensions but a floor would not? Isn't it about usability and egress (since both landing sections are under means of egress headings)...

And yes, I need a means of egress from my dwelling...

 

[TJacobs]

Not to mention, if they worded it floor and landing, people would think they are 2 different things.

 

[Plans Approver]

Look at 1010.6: Landings. Ramps shall have landings at the bottom and top of each ramp, points of turning, entrance, exits and at doors. Landings shall comply with Sections 1010.6.1 through 1010.6.5.

That is the type of wording needed in 1009.5 and R311.5.4.

 

[mtlogcabin]

If I am understanding the OP. The question is which is applicable to a glazed area located near the top of a stair.

#7 is specific to locations not described in #'s 5 or 6 meeting all 4 conditions.

R308.4 Hazardous locations.

The following shall be considered specific hazardous locations for the purposes of glazing:

7. Glazing in an individual fixed or operable panel, other than those locations described in Items 5 and 6 above, that meets all of the following conditions:

7.1. Exposed area of an individual pane larger than 9 square feet (0.836 m2).

7.2. Bottom edge less than 18 inches (457 mm) above the floor.

7.3. Top edge more than 36 inches (914 mm) above the floor.

7.4. One or more walking surfaces within 36 inches (914 mm) horizontally of the glazing.

However #10 is specific and more restrictive to glazed areas located adjacent to a stairway, landings and ramps. After reading other post and the commentary I believe the deck magazine article is incorrect in the fact the window located more than 36" from the stair would only require safety glazing if it met all 4 conditions as outlined in #7'

10. Glazing adjacent to stairways, landings and ramps within 36 inches (914 mm) horizontally of a walking surface when the exposed surface of the glass is less than 60 inches (1524 mm) above the plane of the adjacent walking surface.

"The landing does not have to be a separate component; it may be a portion of a larger walking surface. If the stairs ascend directly to the main area of the deck, the portion of the deck that is the width of the stairs and runs 36 inches beyond the top nosing, measured in the direction of travel, is considered the "landing"

Following the logic in the article this would be more restrictive requiring safety glazing within 72" of the top step then the bottom step which is inherently more dangerous.

11. Glazing adjacent to stairways within 60 inches (1524 mm) horizontally of the bottom tread of a stairway in any direction when the exposed surface of the glass is less than 60 inches (1524 mm) above the nose of the tread.