Appeal 33578

Appeal Summary

Status: Decision on Reconsideration OF 33558

Appeal ID: 33578

Submission Date: 11/13/24 2:08 PM

Hearing Date: 11/20/24

Case #: R-01

Appeal Type: Building

Project Type: Residential

Building/Business Name: a/A Architecture

Appeal Involves: Reconsideration of appeal

Proposed use: Residential

Project Address: 2933 NE 44th Ave

Appellant Name: Christopher Lyman

LUR or Permit Application #: Preliminary

Stories: 2 Occupancy: R-3 Construction Type: V-B

Fire Sprinklers: No

Plans Examiner/Inspector:

Plan Submitted Option: pdf   [File 1]

Payment Option: electronic

Appeal Information Sheet

Appeal item 1

Code Section

R311.7.1

Requires

Stairways shall not be less than 36" in clear width at all points above the permitted handrail height and below the required head room height. The clear width of stairways at and below the handrail height, including treads and railings, shall not be less than 31-1/2 inches where a handrail is installed on one side [...].

Code Modification or Alternate Requested

We are requesting an exemption to the code requirement for overall clear width and width at handrail height.

Proposed Design

Residence includes a pre-existing non-conforming basement stair leading to non-habitable space including a laundry room, storage, and workshop. Existing stair is 2'-4 3/4" at the narrowest point. The stair rise is an inconsistent height (between 6-1/2" and 8-1/2") and stair tread is 8-3/4" deep nosing to nosing. There is no handrail. The minimum head room is 6'-1/2".

Our proposal to improve the safety of the stair is to increase the overall length of the stairwell, thereby allowing for the stair to be rebuilt to meet current code with regards to riser height, tread length, and head height. We also intend to add a handrail to allow the homeowner to better access the laundry room.

Reason for alternative

The width of the existing stair at the top of the run is dictated by a primary bearing wall and a code minimum width hallway which does not allow for a redesign that meets the building code. Moving either the bearing wall or the hallway would be cost prohibitive and require a major renovation that is outside the clients means. We are looking for an exemption to be able to improve the overall safety and usability of the stair for the homeowner.

Reconsideration Text:

  1. Measure clear head height for proposed stair reconstruction on 1/A42 from a line connecting the nosings to the lowest point of the beam or floor opening above. -- We’re proposing a minimum 6’-4” in order to meet the code requirements for rebuilt stairs outlined in the Building Code Guide 96-12, section C.3
  2. Clarify proposed uses in the basement. Will it remain storage or become additional living space? -- We aren’t proposing any usage changes to the basement—our scope is limited to the improvement of the stair to the basement laundry room.
  3. See options in BCG 96-12: Habitable Spaces for options to rebuild stairs in section C.3. --We have reviewed the rebuilt stair options and we are able to meet the requirements for Section C.3 with the exception of the overall width. In fact, it was Section C.3 ("Where this is not feasible due to existing conditions, a building code appeal may be an option") that prompted our appeal.

Appeal Decision

Reduced stairway width of 28 3/4": Granted as proposed.

The Administrative Appeal Board finds that the information submitted by the appellant demonstrates that the approved modifications or alternate methods are consistent with the intent of the code; do not lessen health, safety, accessibility, life, fire safety or structural requirements; and that special conditions unique to this project make strict application of those code sections impractical.