The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutUntitled (232) IPM.Note RE: Solaris Stair width RE: John Plano SMTP JPlano@safebuilt.com John Plano SMTP JPlano@safebuilt.com Mike McGee; Mike Vaughan; srondinelli@bcer.com; Maggie Fitzgerald; dan.feeney@solarisvail.com; Martin Haberle(mhaberle@vailgov.com) Jim Buckner Solaris Stair width Jim, Is there a specific stair you are concerned about? Is this a blanket statement for all exit enclosures? The drawings are indicating 4' 7" stair width with handrails encroaching into that width. I have read though the code sections referenced and also read the Administrative Modifications to see if there is a conflict with the proposal. I don't see an issue with the analogy. There is some verbiage on sheet LS-CS that states 48" is to be maintained between handrails, 1007.3 exception #3 is quoted, stating elimination of the area of refuge with no mention of reducing the width. The exception quoted does allow the clear width to be less than 48", the statement on the life safety sheet is above the code minimum. This statement may be there based on a verbal agreement that I am not aware of. This sheet will have to be changed and approved by the fire protection engineer. This submittal will have to be approved by both the building and fire department. I don't know if the Fire Department requested the additional width for some reason. Sincerely, John Plano Plans Examiner / Senior Building Inspector SAFEbuilt, Colorado P.O. Box 1618 Eagle, CO 81631-1618 (970)328-1790 (877)428-6412 john.plano@safebuilt.com<mailto:john.plano@safebuilt.com> ________________________________ From: Jim Buckner [mailto:Jim.Buckner@davispartnership.com] Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 3:55 PM To: John Plano Cc: Maggie Fitzgerald; dan.feeney@solarisvail.com; srondinelli@bcer.com; Martin Haberle (mhaberle@vailgov.com) Subject: Solaris Stair width John, Our current code data drawings call for 48" minimum exit stair width. Now, we believe we can use exception #3 of secion 1007.3 of the IBC (2003). Would you please verify we are allowed that exception since we are fully-sprinklered and as long as we meet our required calculated stair width per occupant counts? Thank you, Jim Buckner, AIA Davis Partnership Architects P 970.926.8960 X213 | F 926.8961 | M 970.306.2131 Solaris Job Site 970.479.5907 JIM,ISTHEREASPECIFICSTAIRYOUARECONCERNEDABOUT?ISTHISABLANKETSTATEMENTFORALLEXITENCLOSURES?THEDRAWING <html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:st1="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40" xmlns:ns7="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml"> <head> <meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"> <meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 11 (filtered medium)"> <o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="PostalCode"/> <o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="Street"/> <o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="address"/> <o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="State"/> <o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="City"/> <o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="PlaceType"/> <o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="PlaceName"/> <o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="place"/>  <style>  </style>  </head> <body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple> <div class=Section1> Jim,<o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> Is there a specific stair you are concerned about? Is this a blanket statement for all exit enclosures? The drawings are indicating 4’ 7” stair width with handrails encroaching into that width. <o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> I have read though the code sections referenced and also read the Administrative Modifications to see if there is a conflict with the proposal. I don’t see an issue with the analogy.  <o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> There is some verbiage on sheet LS-CS that states 48” is to be maintained between handrails, 1007.3 exception #3 is quoted, stating elimination of the area of refuge with no mention of reducing the width. The exception quoted does allow the clear width to be less than 48”, the statement on the life safety sheet is above the code minimum. This statement may be there based on a verbal agreement that I am not aware of. This sheet will have to be changed and approved by the fire protection engineer. This submittal will have to be approved by both the building and fire department. I don’t know if the Fire Department requested the additional width for some reason.<o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> Sincerely,<o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> <div> John Plano<o:p></o:p> Plans Examiner / <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:PlaceName w:st="on">Senior</st1:PlaceName> <st1:PlaceType w:st="on">Building</st1:PlaceType></st1:place> Inspector<o:p></o:p> <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:City w:st="on">SAFEbuilt</st1:City>, <st1:State w:st="on">Colorado</st1:State></st1:place><o:p></o:p> <st1:address w:st="on"><st1:Street w:st="on">P.O. Box</st1:Street> 1618</st1:address><o:p></o:p> <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:City w:st="on">Eagle</st1:City>, <st1:State w:st="on">CO</st1:State> <st1:PostalCode w:st="on">81631-1618</st1:PostalCode></st1:place><o:p></o:p> (970)328-1790<o:p></o:p> (877)428-6412<o:p></o:p> <a href="mailto:john.plano@safebuilt.com">john.plano@safebuilt.com</a><o:p></o:p> </div> <div> <div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'> <hr size=2 width="100%" align=center tabindex=-1> </div> From: Jim Buckner [mailto:Jim.Buckner@davispartnership.com] Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 3:55 PM To: John Plano Cc: Maggie Fitzgerald; dan.feeney@solarisvail.com; srondinelli@bcer.com; Martin Haberle (mhaberle@vailgov.com) Subject: Solaris Stair width<o:p></o:p> </div> <o:p> </o:p> John,<o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> Our current code data drawings call for 48" minimum exit stair width. Now, we believe we can use exception #3 of secion 1007.3 of the IBC (2003). Would you please verify we are allowed that exception since we are fully-sprinklered and as long as we meet our required calculated stair width per occupant counts?<o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> Thank you,<o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> Jim Buckner, AIA<o:p></o:p> <st1:City w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Davis</st1:place></st1:City> Partnership Architects<o:p></o:p> P 970.926.8960 X213 | F 926.8961 | M 970.306.2131<o:p></o:p> Solaris Job Site 970.479.5907<o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> </div> </body> </html> Mike McGee SMTP MMcGee@vailgov.com MMcGee@vailgov.com Mike McGee Mike Vaughan SMTP MVaughan@vailgov.com MVaughan@vailgov.com Mike Vaughan srondinelli@bcer.com SMTP srondinelli@bcer.com srondinelli@bcer.com srondinelli@bcer.com Jim Buckner SMTP Jim.Buckner@davispartnership.com Jim.Buckner@davispartnership.com Jim Buckner Maggie Fitzgerald SMTP Maggie.Fitzgerald@davispartnership.com Maggie.Fitzgerald@davispartnership.com Maggie Fitzgerald dan.feeney@solarisvail.com SMTP dan.feeney@solarisvail.com dan.feeney@solarisvail.com dan.feeney@solarisvail.com Martin Haberle(mhaberle@vailgov.com) SMTP mhaberle@vailgov.com mhaberle@vailgov.com Martin Haberle(mhaberle@vailgov.com)