Intermediate Handrails at Monumental Stairs

[Glennman CBO]

2009 IBC, E occupancy. Stairs that are overkill on width.

These are approximately 17 ft wide exterior stairs. They follow grade, so guards are not an issue. Required width is 140" based on occupant load.

Handrails are situated as follows, from one side to the other. 30" to the first handrail from the side, approximately 6 ft to the center handrail, then 6 ft to the next handrail, and 30" again to the opposite side. 3 handrails total.

No handrails on the "sides", as the person using the stairs on either side would have a handrail on one side of them, and the edge of the stairs on the other side of them.

They have 180" of width that is within 30" of a handrail.

Code states handrails are required on both sides of stairs. It would appear that they meet the intermediate handrail requirements of 1012.9, but not the requirement for handrails on both sides, per 1009.12.

Any thoughts on this? Thanks all.

 

[mtlogcabin]

A person may choose to walk on either side of the intermediate handrails . Nothing requires a person to be able to reach both handrails at the same time

 

[Architect1281]

IF the extreme sides of the width are not in the natural path (perpendicular to exit point) of travel then I would consider the last "intermediate" rails the end / side

 

[Glenn]

It is clear it does not meet the requirement for handrails on both sides. It's up to you to determine if it meets the "intent".

The 30" clear width between the edge of the stair and the first handrail seems pretty narrow. For the occupancy load your looking at, the minimum width would be 44" with minimal handrail encroachment. I realize the stair width is considered the entire width, and there are no clear restrictions on intermediate handrails...but it does now beg the question, as you look to interpret your situation according to intent and purpose.

Could you have intermediate handrails every 12 inches? Seems that would not work out well for those exiting. If the answer is NO, then what code are you using to back you up. Wouldn't that same code/reasoning be the same for a 30" width?

Hopefully this is still on paper and not already 3D...

 

[lpiburn]

I actually got clarification from the ICC on a similar matter. Of course this is not in writing but here's the gist:

The requirements for handrail spacing on monumental stairs should apply to the "natural" paths of egress travel. At those points, you need to have handrails on both sides of a specific path, but not elsewhere. For an example, consider a museum with 100 or 200 ft. of stair width. In that case you would need a set of two handrails at each end, plus one set directly in front of the main entry doors. The remainder of the main stair can remain uncluttered with extra rails.

Use your required exit width for guidance on how wide that "natural" path should be. That will help determine if you need 2, 3, or more handrails down that given portion of the monumental stair.

Hope this helps,

Logan.

 

[Glennman CBO]

Thanks all... If I was to not consider the 30" on each side of the stairs (the 2, 30" areas on the outermost sides), then they only have 120" of required width left, counting only the 30" areas next to the hand rails. Required width is 140".

 

[Glennman CBO]

Also, Yes... it is 3-D!

 

[IJHumberson]

I agree with Glennman, they have 120" of required width provided - if they want to use the 30 inches along the outermost ends, they'd have to move the outer handrails over, but without adding a 4th handrail, they still only account for 120 inches of required width because each handrail can only be counted for 30 inches. (30 along the inside of each side handrail, plus 30 inches on each side of the center rail.)

They could leave the outer handrails where they are, and, instead of having one center handrail in the middle 12-foot section, they could put two handrails (at 4 foot intervals) and then they'd have 144 inches of egress width in the middle, without having to count the 30-inches at the outer ends.

 

[Glennman CBO]

Update: I told them they need to comply with 1009.12 (handrails on each side). The problem I see here is when students are crowding the stairs, they will be going up and down, even along the outsides (which are actually about 36" wide, as I made a site visit yesterday). If students are going in both directions up and down the stairs, they will be forced to move to the outside, where no handrails will be available. These stairs are exactly 12' in total rise. In the middle sections, students will be able to transverse from handrail to handrail if needed (at least there is one available on both sides there).

I had a friend (no it was not me!) that was getting a final on his new home. There was an issue with the handrail continuity. He had it removed to be welded, and in the mean time, he fell down the stairs and broke his arm. I can see students going down 12 ft of stairs!

Thanks for all your help.

 

[Builder Bob]

unfortunately, the code does not recognize the need for people to ingress and egress a building at the same time..... if we are a mini-maxi state, then the opinion expressed about having handrails within the required width of the means of egress is all that we can require........

 

[tbz]

Thanks all... If I was to not consider the 30" on each side of the stairs (the 2, 30" areas on the outermost sides), then they only have 120" of required width left, counting only the 30" areas next to the hand rails. Required width is 140".

I read this a few times and can't seem to come to the math from the OP.

You noted the total stair width in the OP was 17ft or 204", if we take the 30 + 30 = 60 from the 204 you are left with 144"

I am confused with your 120" when the match comes up 144" and only 14" is required per post?

If you are 6ft c/l from handrail to handrail to handrail you are 144" from c/l of outer handrail to c/l of outer handrail, and the handrails are allowed to encrouch on the stairway, thus I would say they are fine based on the math, unless your 6ft notations are really 5ft and your 17ft OA is really 15ft OA.

Or am I just reading something wrong here...

Tom

 

[Glennman CBO]

I'm saying that if the 2 outside areas of the stairway are not to be included, and you only count the 30" areas next to the handrails that are included, you only end up with:

3 handrails, the middle one has 30" on each side of it, the other 2 handrails will only add (1) 30" area next to them, each. This totals 120".

If you include the (2) outside areas, you would have 180". However, the (2) outside areas are not in the most direct path of egress travel (in this case).

Before this issue came up, I had not considered that you would only count the 30" areas next to handrails for required widths of the stairs. This is really a bit of a snafu because this isn't stated in 1005.1 in determining minimum egress widths for stairways. One does not discover this until the stairs become "monument" and need intermediate handrails.

 

[tbz]

I'm saying that if the 2 outside areas of the stairway are not to be included, and you only count the 30" areas next to the handrails that are included, you only end up with: 3 handrails, the middle one has 30" on each side of it, the other 2 handrails will only add (1) 30" area next to them, each. This totals 120".

If you include the (2) outside areas, you would have 180". However, the (2) outside areas are not in the most direct path of egress travel (in this case).

Before this issue came up, I had not considered that you would only count the 30" areas next to handrails for required widths of the stairs. This is really a bit of a snafu because this isn't stated in 1005.1 in determining minimum egress widths for stairways. One does not discover this until the stairs become "monument" and need intermediate handrails.

Got it,

Sorry was not following the 30" both sides, with the 72" width if they moved inward on each end to be 60" on c/l that would satisfy both the additional egress width required and allow use of the outer area on the outer handrails to be used.

I was not following the outer and 30" limit.