Section E3901.7

[north star]

* * *

I have a McMansion house that I am reviewing plans on. In the

Master Bathroom, there is a whirpool tub enclosed by walls on

three sides with granite steps & 15" risers. On the plans,

there are 2 wall mounted snap switches indicated in the

enclosure area, for lighting above the tub.

QUESTION # 1: Does Section E3901.7 require these proposed

snap switches to be outside of the enclosure area ( i.e. - is the

enclosure area considered to be a ' wet ' area?, or a ' damp '

one, or nothing at all? ).

QUESTION # 2: Are these risers too high and can they be

addressed by R311.5.3.1 for riser heights?

Thank you for your input!

* * *

 

[Yankee]

Are the enclosure walls in proximity to the tub (or, several feet away?). If in proximity I'd say no can do, wet area.

How many 15" risers?

 

[north star]

* * *

Yes, the walls are in very close proximity to the

whirly-pool. All three walls almost touch the edge

of the tub rim.

There are three risers leading up to the edge of the

whirly-pool, ...two steps.

* * *

 

[mark handler]

Switches must be outside of the enclosure area, unless you by alternate means allow waterproof switches.

Steps technically would need to comply, but there are no steps required, and they are not part of exit system, discretionary, my concern would be the wet coefficient of friction of the treads

 

[north star]

* * *

While technically ' not ' part of the required exiting components from the

elevated whirpool, ...since the risers will be installed, can Section R311.5.3.2

be used to require the risers be lowered to a max. height of 7 3/4"?



Also, I agree about the "wet coefficient surfaces", but I do not have a

code sectiion that I can reference to require hand rails or a non-slippery

surface application. I can only "request" compliance of the adopted

codes, ...after the project is completed, [ typically ] the homeowner

will do [ alter ] whatever they want to anyway.



* * *

 

[Yankee]

I'd be inclined to allow the three risers, one is entering and exiting the tub, not walking up and down stairs in an upright position

 

[mark handler]

North Star

I feel the stair tread height, and number in this case is discretionary.

Under the IRC I do not think there is a COF requirement for this type of stair.

If you require more treads, you may force them to omit them and add them later, If you allow them you have some control.

You could allow them if they provide, a certain COF? Discretionary.

 

[peach]

who proposes 15" risers? Even not in the means of egress, are the users 7' tall?

inside the enclosure is a wet area, not damp, not dry..

 

[RJJ]

Steps are steps and risers are risers! the open question is : What ,when is the code applied? If 7 3/4 is the max allowed for a riser the 7 3/4" it is. I don't see an exception for tubs. This has been kicked around in the attic stair threads! Oh no I said it again!

In short, If it is not an exception then it applies ever place. IMHO

Oh yes wet area!

 

[peach]

I agree.. it's risers.. (what was the designer thinking?)

 

[Yankee]

They are clearly not risers, or they would be 7 3/4" high max. (Did you get that convoluted logic? : )

IMO this is a much different scenario than access to an attic. You're naked, for one thing. You very well may using your hands as well as your feet, at least the hand that isn't holding the wine glass. . .

 

[RJJ]

Well sometimes when I go to the attic I am naked!