• Welcome to the new and improved Building Code Forum. We appreciate you being here and hope that you are getting the information that you need concerning all codes of the building trades. This is a free forum to the public due to the generosity of the Sawhorses, Corporate Supporters and Supporters who have upgraded their accounts. If you would like to have improved access to the forum please upgrade to Sawhorse by first logging in then clicking here: Upgrades

Tapered Steps

BayPointArchitect

BayPointArchitect

Sawhorse
Joined
Oct 19, 2009
Messages
516
Location
Lincoln
Code Reference:2009 IBCIBC 1009.4.2; Riser height = 7 inches max and 4 inches minimum.IBC 1009.4.4; Dimensional Uniformity = The tolerance between risers shall not exceed 3/8".Required width of stairs for egress would not need to be more than 44 inches.A portion of these stairs that complies with the sections above is approximately 9 feet. (Okay)The architect for this project believes that if the required width of stairway complies with uniform steps, then those portions of the steps that are tapered according to the natural slope do not need to comply. Thus we have step risers than vary from zero to 7 inches. In addition, the architect is proposing to apply yellow slip resistant surface to help identify the steps that do not comply with those steps used specifically to meet the egress requirements.Option one: Put a guard rail or planter to block the steps that do not comply with the sections above.Option two: Considering that the minimum width for egress has been provided through a portion of these stairs, then allow other stairs to vary in riser height from zero to seven inches.Thank you!ICC Certified Plan ReviewerGo Huskers!

View attachment 1924

View attachment 1924

/monthly_2013_08/steps.jpg.1c2d5d94a45c60cdff4e70ad390e94fc.jpg
 
You missed a code section

1003.5 Elevation change.

Where changes in elevation of less than 12 inches (305 mm) exist in the means of egress , sloped surfaces shall be used. Where the slope is greater than one unit vertical in 20 units horizontal (5-percent slope), ramps complying with Section 1010 shall be used

MEANS OF EGRESS. A continuous and unobstructed path of vertical and horizontal egress travel from any occupied portion of a building or structure to a public way .

Option one is the only one that will work.

 
is the little piece of brown sticking out a trip hazard walking left to right or right to left as you look at the picture?
 
I am sure the designer will say they are not the means of egress and it will be difficult to fight.....If it were a stair....it would need handrails also.....correct?
 
Why on new work would anyone consider the tapered stair, the lower level should be flat with a uniform rise across the width of the stariway.

Then the total rise would be 14 inches and the sloped entry clause would go away MtLogcabin.

the next question that is not determinable for the limited information is what is the accessible route to the entry door and is it direct as possibe.
 
The sloped steps were the solution for dealing with natural grade changes.

The plans did include a standard stair section but there was nothing to indicate that the bottom steps would vary between zero to 7 inches.

After reviewing your comments and talking with my fellow plan reviewer, it has been determined that we will require the striping for those steps that are equal 7 inch risers with no variation.

All other steps will be obstructed with either a guard rail or planter.

Thanks fellow building code enthusiasts!
 
I don't mean to state the obvious, but you are aware that Sec 1009.7.4 (2012), allows variances in riser height due to sloped surfaces, not to exceed 1:12, right? The gray area is where the change in elevation is reduced to only one riser.
 
BayPointArchitect said:
After reviewing your comments and talking with my fellow plan reviewer, it has been determined that we will require the striping for those steps that are equal 7 inch risers with no variation.

All other steps will be obstructed with either a guard rail or planter.
Click to expand...
I see that section in the 2009 IBC as well TBO (1009.4.4). The striping requirement is clearly for the non-uniform risers (bottom step only).

I'm thinking that requiring striping on the uniform risers and requiring other areas to be obstructed is simply writing your own code.

Bill
 
Duly noted.

Thanks Bill and TexasBO.

You just saved them from having to spend money on unnecessary obstruction to steps.

They will likely opt for the 1 inch striping on the bottom step.
 
lpiburn said:
Reminds me of an image I used on a presentation on ADA regulations. It was in the "nice try, but no" section.View attachment 1955
Click to expand...
See, I look at that and see the ultimate expression of non discrimination on the planet, where the able bodied and the handicapped can freely move amongst one another in harmony and peace, weaving in and out in a dance of peaceful coexistence. It's art as life, as it were.

Brent.
 
Sure, it's all sunshine and daisies until somebody in a wheelchair goes careening down the steps, bowling over those harmonious able bodied persons like a scene out of a cartoon. :D
 
lpiburn said:
Sure, it's all sunshine and daisies until somebody in a wheelchair goes careening down the steps, bowling over those harmonious able bodied persons like a scene out of a cartoon. :D
Click to expand...
Fly! Be free!

Brent
 
This remind me of a brand new government building that was finished about two years ago.

6152907773_6342f33bcb_b.jpg


how did they got away with it?
 
error404 said:
This remind me of a brand new government building that was finished about two years ago.
6152907773_6342f33bcb_b.jpg


how did they got away with it?
Click to expand...
Is that a federal, state or local government building? What state is it located in, it's certainly not California. Depending on how concerned you are and how much of a stinky want to raise I would think you could cause them some trouble quite easily.
 
Msradell said:
Is that a federal, state or local government building? What state is it located in, it's certainly not California. Depending on how concerned you are and how much of a stinky want to raise I would think you could cause them some trouble quite easily.
Click to expand...
It's the new Court House for my State's Capital... I believe under IBC 2006 /120,000 sq.ft. brand new construction. (not telling which State yet ;) def. not California)

BTW this is the main entrance ->

gid3.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top