Handrail for stadium seating

[BayPointArchitect]

Applicable code:2012 IBC Chapter 10, handrails.There is a proposal to have an open assembly area within a larger office area to have stadium seating. There is one access aisle on one side only with only hand rail. Normally a handrail is required on BOTH sides of a stairway but it is common that end aisles serving stadium seating for movie theaters will have one hand rail running along the half-high wall. In this scenario, we are missing the upholstered seats.Does anyone provide a definitive answer whether-or-not the handrails sketched in red-yellow would be needed?See attachment.Happy Holidays!ICC Certified Plan ReviewerNFPA Certified Fire Plan Examiner

View attachment 2169

View attachment 2169

/monthly_2015_12/Handrails.jpg.e8a95790af401a7c635d011db8956ed3.jpg

 

[cda]

Not an ibc person

But with the stairs seems like the answer is yes,

Not only for handrail but so you do not walk off the stairs onto the seating area

 

[RLGA]

Only the one handrail is required per Section 1028.13 (2012 IBC). The configuration you show is very similar to a bleacher or grandstand, which are regulated by ICC 300. Although not technically a bleacher or grandstand by definition (definition requires them not to be a element of a building), ICC 300 requires only one handrail on the non-seating side, which is comparable to the requirement in the IBC. Therefore, I do not think the added handrails you show are required.

 

[north star]

@ ~ ~ @



Section 1028.13, Exception # 2 seems to indicate that handrails

would not be required.

From Section 1028.13, Ex. # 2:

2."Handrails are not required if, at the side of the aisle, there is

a guard that complies with the graspability requirements of

handrails."



@ ~ ~ @

 

[cda]

Only the one handrail is required per Section 1028.13 (2012 IBC). The configuration you show is very similar to a bleacher or grandstand, which are regulated by ICC 300. Although not technically a bleacher or grandstand by definition (definition requires them not to be a element of a building), ICC 300 requires only one handrail on the non-seating side, which is comparable to the requirement in the IBC. Therefore, I do not think the added handrails you show are required.

Could see code does not require a handrail,,

But what about a "guard" so if you are on one of the two stairs, a person does not step down to the actual seating level, and bust their head???

 

[BayPointArchitect]

Head busting is permitted according to IBC 1013.2. Guard rails not required along the open-sided walking surface (including stairs) where the vertical surface below is less than 30 inches.

 

[cda]

Head busting is permitted according to IBC 1013.2. Guard rails not required along the open-sided walking surface (including stairs) where the vertical surface below is less than 30 inches.

OK, go forth and build

Maybe the lawsuit would make them required?? but anyway

 

[Yikes]

OK, go forth and buildMaybe the lawsuit would make them required?? but anyway

I agree that both:

- the handrail is not required

- a busted head is quite likely to happen.

It is a clever idea to have what appears to be a main exit POT from the second floor become part of an aisle exit system... perhaps a bit too clever...?

 

[north star]

& = & > %

" Maybe the lawsuit would make them required?? "

That approach hasn't seemed to change the ADA landscape, ...yet ! % ~ @ = +

 

[cda]

& = & > %That approach hasn't seemed to change the ADA landscape, ...yet !

% ~ @ = +

Places may retro even if they meet code;;;

http://edition.cnn.com/2011/SPORT/07/19/texas.rangers.ballpark.safety/

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/ct-fan-death-braves-yankees-20150831-story.html