• Welcome to The Building Code Forum

    Your premier resource for building code knowledge.

    This forum remains free to the public thanks to the generous support of our Sawhorse Members and Corporate Sponsors. Their contributions help keep this community thriving and accessible.

    Want enhanced access to expert discussions and exclusive features? Learn more about the benefits here.

    Ready to upgrade? Log in and upgrade now.

Swinging over a step

Sifu

Sifu

SAWHORSE
Joined
Sep 3, 2011
Messages
3,388
This seems to be a no brainer but in looking for a code section to back it up I now have a shadow of a doubt. I have never run into it until now. Got a guy swinging an interior door into a bathroom, down a step. My quick check only found this addressed under Means of Egress. Anybody with a sound opinion as to whether this is applicable to an interior bathroom door please sound off.
 
IRC R311.5.4 Landings for stairways. I think the term "Stairways" throws people off. In my opinion it is saying that if there is a step down then the door can't swing out over it. Consider the floor on the other side as the "Top Step" of the stairs. Granted, chances are someone isn't going to get hurt quite as bad as falling down a whole flight of stairs, but it doesn't take much to break an ankle dropping from even less than a full step down. Not to mention what you may hit on your way to the floor!

My 2 cents.
 
The door cannot swing over the stair

STAIR. A change in elevation, consisting of one or more risers.

R311.7.5 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.
 
To start with, I think swinging a door over a step is a really bad idea. That being said I don't enforce bad ideas (or good ones). The code I am limited to is the 06 IRC and 311 deals only with the means of egress. I don't really see a bathroom as in the means of egress. This is part of a bigger issue I have. I get accused of being too "heavy handed" with the codes. I actually believe the opposite is true. I usually try to find a path of compliance for this type of thing. So when I found this condition today after my initial reaction of "uh-oh" I started thinking about whether it is something I can or should really enforce. I don't want to invent codes just because I havn't seen it before or I think it is a bad idea. I havn't exhausted my code search yet but a quick check of the code, commentary, interpretations and Q&A book and I still can't find anything that would not permit this condition. Maybe the intent is there but its a little vague to force a major renovation at a final inspection.

FYI this same contractor has a bathroom with less than the required headroom over the fixtures ( I bang my head ), a top step 1 1/2" shorter than the rest, backfill/grade higher than his framed walls behind his brick veneer (weep holes buried) and a multitude of other items I consider no-brainers. And before anyone says this could have been caught earlier, I don't think they reasonably could have. First, since this is a jurisdiction that prior to last July had no codes my hands have been tied by a) no official plan review and approval, b) no code adoption other than 06 IRC, (no commercial enforcement) c) no other code officials/chief to defer to and d) no plumbing or mechanical inspection/adoption. I did "review" the chicken scratch that was submitted and pointed out several issues, however the bathroom was not on the plan. It is possible it was in at the framing inspection but I have no recollection of it and I usually do catch that type of thing (caught a similar plumbing clearance issue by this guy a couple of houses ago). This guy is notorious for adding and squeezing things in wherever he finds an extra square inch. The step is something that maybe could have been caught but I always tell them at framing to pay attention to riser heights since I don't know what finish floor material will be installed and since temporary treads are always installed at that point. Anyway, lot of venting here but I'm at a loss with some of these guys and no support from the county commisioners and supervisors who voted in codes without knowing what they were getting in to. Because of that I try my best to only enforce the codes I have written words to back up. Whew!
 
* * *

Stair not defined in the `06 IRC ! :o

Hang in there " Sifu ".......Do the best that you can, with

what you have to work with........We feel yore pain!

* * *
 
mtlogcabin said:
The door cannot swing over the stairSTAIR. A change in elevation, consisting of one or more risers.

R311.7.5 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.
Click to expand...
Doesn't 311 only refer to means of egress?
 
Sifu said:
Doesn't 311 only refer to means of egress?
Click to expand...
R311.1 Means of egress.

All dwellings shall be provided with a means of egress as provided in this section. The means of egress shall provide a continuous and unobstructed path of vertical and horizontal egress travel from all portions of the dwelling to the exterior of the dwelling at the required egress door without requiring travel through a garage.

That would include egress stairs from the bathroom IMHO

Remember one riser is a stair under the IRC
 
If it was meant specifically to apply only to the means of egress, why would section R311.7.5 identify a situation with a stairway to an enclosed garage when you are prohibited to have a means of egress through a garage?
 
I agree with mtlogcabin. The stairs are required to comply, just like an exterior 2nd floor balcony with no grade access (thus, no means of egress) is required to comply with R311.5.1.
 
north star said:
* * *Stair not defined in the `06 IRC ! :o

Hang in there " Sifu ".......Do the best that you can, with

what you have to work with........We feel yore pain!

* * *
Click to expand...
STAIR. A change in elevation, consisting of one or more risers.
 
I don't have the link, but we have hashed this out before. This section of the code was voted "3rd worst" for clarity in our poll last year.

Stairs can't swing over the stairs. The references provided abofe clarify that.
 
mtlogcabin said:
R311.1 Means of egress.All dwellings shall be provided with a means of egress as provided in this section. The means of egress shall provide a continuous and unobstructed path of vertical and horizontal egress travel from all portions of the dwelling to the exterior of the dwelling at the required egress door without requiring travel through a garage.

That would include egress stairs from the bathroom IMHO

Remember one riser is a stair under the IRC
Click to expand...
06 doesn't contain that definition but in any case I see the point. I don't have the 09 or 12 with me at the moment and its a stretch to invoke them if a battle ensues (remember I'm extremely limited here). I was looking for a reasonable way out of this for the contractor but it seems we all agree the spirit of the code, if not the actual wording in the later editions, that the bathroom would be considered part of the means of egress and the swing shouldn't be over the step-down. Not to mention it is a potentially hazardous condition. Who knows, given his other problems this one may be the least of his concerns. (or mine)

Kind of glad to know this issue was voted one of the muddiest in the past. Have I ever mentioned I wish I would have found this forum a long time ago?
 
Where terms are not defined in this code, such terms shall have the meanings ascribed to them as in other code publications of the INternational Code Council. Section R201.3.
 
Sifu

Use the following for your code path

Big Mac said:
Where terms are not defined in this code, such terms shall have the meanings ascribed to them as in other code publications of the INternational Code Council. Section R201.3.
Click to expand...
Then the 2006 IBC definition

STAIR. A change in elevation, consisting of one or more risers

same as the 2009 IRC

Even though the "actual wording" in the 2006 IRC isn't easy to find the wording within the ICC codes is there for you to use.
 
Big Mac said:
Where terms are not defined in this code, such terms shall have the meanings ascribed to them as in other code publications of the INternational Code Council. Section R201.3.
Click to expand...
Or the dictionary (Websters, Funk & Wagnalls, etc.) definition. - quoting my instructor at Butte College
 
= =



" ...b) no code adoption other than 06 IRC, (no commercial enforcement)... "
Click to expand...
Me thinks that his hands [ so-to-speak ] are tied.....In the discussion,

he has stated that no other codes have been adopted.

How can he enforce something that has not yet been adopted?

Regardless of the definitions in other code books, he is already

fighting an uphill battle [ that is desired by the local

"powers-that-be" ].......I do not know, but would guess that

referring to another code book [ not adopted ] will not be

acceptable.

= =
 
Appreciate all the input from everybody. Just wanted to make sure I wasn't inventing code to back something I only thought was code.
 
north star said:
= =

Me thinks that his hands [ so-to-speak ] are tied.....In the discussion,

he has stated that no other codes have been adopted.

How can he enforce something that has not yet been adopted?

Regardless of the definitions in other code books, he is already

fighting an uphill battle [ that is desired by the local

"powers-that-be" ].......I do not know, but would guess that

referring to another code book [ not adopted ] will not be

acceptable.

= =
Click to expand...
I will refer to other books if need be, I use the WFCM often (of course nobody knows what that is so maybe that makes me safe) but prefer to keep it clean if I can. In the end though nothing will be "acceptable". As I told my boss yesterday who was "talking" to me about a complaint about my attitude; "you can sprinkle sugar all over the word NO but it is still NO"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top