Egress windows

[Mrskbs]

Is there a code for how big egress fire escape windows need to be? Also, how far from the ground on the outside and how far from the floor on the inside?

 

[Jay Smith]

Assuming you mean for a house, that information is at the link below, in section R310. I chose the 2015 IRC because it’s listed on the city website for Palmer, Alaska.

2015 INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE (IRC) | ICC DIGITAL CODES

ICC Digital Codes is the largest provider of model codes, custom codes and standards used worldwide to construct safe, sustainable, affordable and resilient structures.

codes.iccsafe.org

 

[Mrskbs]

Thank you!

 

[fatboy]

Is this an existing building? When was it built? Only has to comply with the adopted code in effect at the time of construction.

 

[Mrskbs]

It’s an existing structure build in 1960s or 80s (can’t remember which). If it was to be sold though, would it need to have the most current code?

 

[fatboy]

No, the sale of the home does not require a code upgrade. I believe the first "emergency escape and rescue openings" EERO's, commonly known as "egress windows", did not come into the code until 1970, or 1973.

If in fact the house was built in the 80's, dependent what year edition the ADOPTED code was, the EERO's may have been required. The height from the outside grade below did not come in until 2015 I believe?

You need to know when the house was built. what code was adopted locally, before you move on with whatever you are pursuing.

 

[Inspector Gift]

LOL, I have to ask: "When did Alaska first adopt building codes?"

I agree with Fatboy. If the house was built prior to the adoption of building codes, then the existing egress windows are legal.

 

[ICE]

The following is current California code:

R310.2.1 Minimum opening area. Emergency and escape rescue openings shall have a net clear opening of not less than 5.7 square feet. The net clear opening dimensions required by this section shall be obtained by the normal operation of the emergency escape and rescue opening from the inside. The net clear height of the opening shall be not less than 24 inches and the net clear width shall be not less than 20 inches.

Exception: Grade floor openings* or below-grade openings shall have a net clear opening area of not less than 5 square feet.

R310.2.2 Window sill height. Where a window is provided as the emergency escape and rescue opening, it shall have the bottom of the clear opening not greater than 44 inches measured from the floor; where the sill height is below grade, it shall be provided with a window well in accordance with Section R310.2.

* GRADE FLOOR OPENING. A window or other opening located such that the sill height of the opening is not more than 44 inches above or below the finished ground level adjacent to the opening. (See also “Emergency escape and rescue opening.”)


What happened in Palmer Alaska years ago stands today ... unless it was a code violation then, in which case it would still be a code violation today.

 

[Yikes]

It’s an existing structure build in 1960s or 80s (can’t remember which). If it was to be sold though, would it need to have the most current code?

Alaska Building Code:

[A] 102.6 Existing Structures​

​

The legal occupancy of any structure existing on the date of adoption of this code shall be permitted to continue without change, except as is specifically covered in this code or the International Fire Code, or as is deemed necessary by the building official for the general safety and welfare of the occupants and the public.​

Also, I don't know if Alaska also adopted the International Existing Building Code like we did in California, but IEBC 505.3 allows existing escape windows to be replaced and potentially even be made smaller as long as it's "the manufacturer's largest standard size that will fit within the existing frame or existing rough opening". This allows for more energy efficient windows to be replace the old inefficient windows, without having to reframe openings.

https://up.codes/viewer/california/ca-existing-building-code-2019/chapter/5/prescriptive-compliance-method#505.3

505.3 Replacement Window Emergency Escape and Rescue Openings​

​

Where windows are required to provide emergency escape and rescue openings in Group R-2 and R-3 occupancies and one- and two-family dwellings and townhouses regulated by the California Residential Code, replacement windows shall be exempt from the requirements of Sections 1030.2, 1030.3 and 1030.4 of the California Building Code and Sections R310.2.1, R310.2.2 and R310.2.3 of the California Residential Code, provided that the replacement window meets the following conditions:​

1. The replacement window is the manufacturer's largest standard size window that will fit within the existing frame or existing rough opening. The replacement window shall be permitted to be of the same operating style as the existing window or a style that provides for an equal or greater window opening area than the existing window.
2. The replacement of the window is not part of a change of occupancy.

Window opening control devices complying with ASTM F2090 shall be permitted for use on windows required to provide emergency escape and rescue openings.

 

[ICE]

replacement windows shall be exempt from the requirements of Sections 1030.2, 1030.3 and 1030.4 of the California Building Code and Sections R310.2.1, R310.2.2 and R310.2.3 of the California Residential Code, provided that the replacement window meets the following conditions:

1. The replacement window is the manufacturer's largest standard size window that will fit within the existing frame or existing rough opening. The replacement window shall be permitted to be of the same operating style as the existing window or a style that provides for an equal or greater window opening area than the existing window.

This code is a mistake that should not have been allowed in code. Note that condition #1 says "manufacture's largest standard size". Retrofit windows are never a standard size. Retrofit windows are custom manufactured for each opening.
I suspect that this replacement window code was a gimme to the retrofit window industry so Shirely my assessment is wrong. I am hearing from former coworkers that the AHJ is getting ready to toss this code.

 

[fatboy]

Me thinks Mrskbs did not find the answer they were seeking.

A quick lil search and I found out that Palmer, AK, lags a little behind in Code adoption. (I'm jealous)

 

[fatboy]

I quit searching too soon.....my apologies.

 

[Yikes]

This code is a mistake that should not have been allowed in code. Note that condition #1 says "manufacture's largest standard size". Retrofit windows are never a standard size. Retrofit windows are custom manufactured for each opening.
I suspect that this replacement window code was a gimme to the retrofit window industry so Shirely my assessment is wrong. I am hearing from former coworkers that the AHJ is getting ready to toss this code.

I've worked on publicly funded low income apartment rehabs in California. The Tax Credit Allocation Committee requires their funds to achieve improvements in energy efficiency (it was typically 25% improvement over existing conditions). Replacing single-glazed windows with low-e dual glazed is among the lowest hanging fruit to achieve both energy efficiency and extend the useful life of the building envelope.

Until IEBC/CEBC 505.3 came into being, the problem was that replacing existing nail-fin windows meant, at a minimum, chipping out the stucco to expose the nail fin, then removing the old frame. Often the old building paper would tear in the process, and the contractor would find themselves chipping away more and more stucco in hopes of find enough undamaged paper that they could lap in new building paper. Do this enough times and you might have removed enough stucco (which used to provide some prescriptive lateral shear resistance in the old codes) that next thing you know, the AHJ is asking you to re-evaluate the structure's seismic systems. No you've opened a real can of worms.
And that's the best case scenario.

I'd seen the worst case scenarios when AHJ's determined that window replacement was not considered a like-for-like repair, and thus triggered code compliance as if for new construction. Thus an escape window size that would've been compliant at time of original permit in 1966 now needs to have the rough opening structural frame enlarged and/or lowered to meet new code. so you have all the problems described above, plus framing, drywall, etc. at every bedroom window for 200 bedrooms... all at a prevailing wage rate.

I hope AHJ's don't toss this code. We really need IEBC 505.3 (even if you want to tweak the word "standard") to make reasonable improvements in efficiency and to preserve our aging housing stock.

From life-safety standpoint, keep in mind that in most of the U.S. (areas which adopted the latest IBC 1030 without amendments), bedroom escape openings aren't required by code is the building story has access to two exits.

 

[ICE]

I quit searching too soon.....my apologies.

View attachment 9139

That’s okay fatboy….we know…..

 

[ICE]

Yikes,
Point taken. My experience with this code has been SFD window replacement with retrofit windows. There are retrofit windows that reduce the net opening by 6" each way. Then the contractor gets a letter from the manufacturer stating that what was done was as good as it gets.

In the long run, a smaller window will not be an issue until there is a need to exit through the window.....what's the odds that a need will arise? And even if it did happen the hole is still large enough for all but a few people. Add to that, a great many people couldn't make it out of a compliant EERO. I have a problem with poorly conceived code.

 

[Yikes]

Add to that, a great many people couldn't make it out of a compliant EERO. I have a problem with poorly conceived code.

I hear what you're saying, but it's both an "escape" opening and a "rescue" opening. so it's not just about an occupant getting out, it's also about emergency personnel getting in.

That said, thanks in large part to ongoing improvements in building, systems and appliance technology and decreases in open flame use (smoking), very few fire department responses are for actual fires - - only 3.8% on national average. I'm inclined to agree with the IBC that EEROs are not as important as they used to be in order to achieve basic levels of public safety, especially on floors with two means of egress.

https://www.usfa.fema.gov/data/statistics/states/california.html

 

[fatboy]

That’s okay fatboy….we know…..

You just can't stop yourself I guess..............

 

[Jact]

I was cited by our local plan reviewer where I indicated on plan to egress to an approved egress window (meeting all the requirements), and exiting through a sloping roof (5:12). How different is that to jump off a 2nd floor window down to public way below to a side yard or rear yard. And what if the side and rear yard slopes. Is that not allowed? Pls advise!

 

[classicT]

I was cited by our local plan reviewer where I indicated on plan to egress to an approved egress window (meeting all the requirements), and exiting through a sloping roof (5:12). How different is that to jump off a 2nd floor window down to public way below to a side yard or rear yard. And what if the side and rear yard slopes. Is that not allowed? Pls advise!

What did they cite? EERO are just that, the openings.

R310.1 provides that "Emergency escape and rescue openings shall open directly into a public way, or to a yard or court having a minimum width of 36 inches (914 mm) that opens to a public way."

Does your EERO open via a dormer onto the roof below? A picture or sketch may help here.

 

[Jact]

What did they cite? EERO are just that, the openings.

R310.1 provides that "Emergency escape and rescue openings shall open directly into a public way, or to a yard or court having a minimum width of 36 inches (914 mm) that opens to a public way."

Does your EERO open via a dormer onto the roof below? A picture or sketch may help here.

 

[classicT]

I'm not seeing an issue right off the bat.

Looks like you have a 5'0"x4'0"SL and a 3'0x'4'0"SH in the bedroom that open to a yard. The SH may not have the opening height (24"), but I see no issue with the SL.

Are the windows located such that the window opening is no more than 44" above the finished floor?

 

[Jact]

I'm not seeing an issue right off the bat.

Looks like you have a 5'0"x4'0"SL and a 3'0x'4'0"SH in the bedroom that open to a yard. The SH may not have the opening height (24"), but I see no issue with the SL.

Are the windows located such that the window opening is no more than 44" above the finished floor?

The window sill height is at 2'-8" a.f.f.(see attached section)

 

[classicT]

The window sill height is at 2'-8" a.f.f.(see attached section)

I dont see the issue then...

 

[Jact]

I dont see the issue then...

Thank you classicT......I will try to see whether this local jurisdiction will allow me to pursue this or perhaps take this to the office of state fire marshal to give the thumbs up. Thanks for your time.