Me
mo
From: Lonell Butler, Chief Building Official – Planning and Building Department Felicia Bryant, Fire Marshal – Oakland Fire Department
Date: October 18, 2024
Re: General Plan Update, Housing Action Item 3.5.5 - Study Feasibility of Single-Stair Residential Buildings
ACT
ION ITEM SUMMARY
B
uilding regulations serve to establish minimum safety standards in construction. Historically, fire and life safety strategies have focused on standards that ensure building occupants are able to safely evacuate a building during an emergency. Modern strategies focus more on containing fires where they occur through sprinkler systems, fire alarms, pressurized stairwells, fire-treated lumber, and similar strategies.
T
he California Building Code Chapter 10 Means of Egress addresses all portions of the egress system (exit access, exits and exit discharge) and includes design requirements as well as provisions regulating individual components. The requirements detail the size, arrangement, number and protection of means of egress components. In contrast, the City of Seattle allows for building up to six stories to include only one stairway for egress, and many European residential buildings are constructed as tall as ten stories with single-stair access. A single-stair, or vertical shared access, building construction allows for greater flexibility in design, more efficient layouts, and potentially reduced costs. Currently, there are gaps in available data regarding the impact of these building code requirements on increasing construction cost and the safety benefits of requiring a second egress in combination with fire containment strategies.
T
he City of Oakland cannot unilaterally relax these California Building Code stairway and egress code requirements; change would be required at the state level. Nonetheless, the City will study current stairway and egress requirements, including any potential fire life safety concerns and consideration of what cost savings could be incurred through revision of the second egress requirement. .
O
bjective: Create additional information on single-stair reform that could assist in promoting statewide changes to the California Building Code second egress requirements.
P
LANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT & OAKLAND FIRE DEPARTMENT RESPONSE • Per 4/28 meeting with the Planning and Building Department (PBD) and the Oakland Fir e D
epartment (OFD), it was established that local jurisdictions may adopt amendments to the model codes based on local findings (climatic, topographic, and geologic) only if they are more restrictive. Reducing 1 Attachment A
the number of required exits would be less restrictive and in no case shall amendments to the model codes be less restrictive (Ref. CBC 1.1.8.1).
• Regarding the Seattle Building Code and their modifications to IBC 1006 – In October 2022, PBD reached out to the Seattle Department of Construction and Inspections (SDCI) for clarification on how they were able to make such modifications to the Uniform Building Code in the late 1970’s. Their reply, while local Washington state jurisdictions have their amendments reviewed by the Washington State Building Code Council (WSBCC), WSBCC neither approves nor denies such modifications. In other words, SDCI does not have the same restrictions California jurisdictions face when modifying buildin g c
ode language.
• Regarding European residential buildings with single stairway designs, a major justification for single stair designs of European buildings is that balconies serve as the second exit based on the Fire Department’s ability to conduct “bucket rescues” by having “monstrous fire apparatuses”. In the 4/28 meet
ing cited above, the Fire Marshal stated the OFD is not prepared to perform such rescues on a consistent basis and cited such issues as the existence of overhead utilities, road widths and parking obs
tructions not consistently addressed.
• CA Assembly Bill 835, Introduced February 2023, charges the Office of the State Fire Marshal (OSFM) to “…research standards for single-exit, single stairway multiunit residential buildings above three s
tories and provide a report to the Joint Legislative Committee on Emergency Management and to th e C
alifornia Building Standards Commission by January 1, 2025.” OFD reached out to the OSFM for their input. They indicated they had not yet taken a position but are watching closely.
CO
NCLUSION
T
he Oakland Planning and Building Department and the Oakland Fire Department does not deem the objective of Housing Action Item 3.5.5 feasible. Due to the restrictions of how the City of Oakland may propose changes to the code that does not include our ability to lessen building standards, the differences of emergency response and fire apparatus between Oakland and other regions around the world, and because a similar effort has been placed on the OSFM with decision published. We will continue to monitor the OSFM until a conclusion is reached and findings published resulting in the California Model Building Codes being modified accordingly.
Lo nell Butler
Lonell Butler (Oct 21, 2024 13:10 PDT)
Felicia B ryant
Felicia Bryant (Oct 21, 2024 13:55 PDT)
Lonell Butler
Chief Building Official
Planning and Building Department
Felicia Bryant
Fire Marshal
Oakland Fire Department
2 PBD OFD ACTION ITEM 3.5.5 RESPONSE
MEMO_10-18-2024
Final Audit Report 2024-10-21
"
PBD OFD ACTION ITEM 3.5.5 RESPONSE MEMO_10-18-202
4" History
D ocument created by Timothy Green ([email protected]) 2024-10-21 - 12:38:10 PM PDT- IP address: 45.27.30.122
D
ocument emailed to Lonell Butler ([email protected]) for signature 2024-10-21 - 12:38:59 PM PDT
D
ocument emailed to Felicia Bryant ([email protected]) for signature 2024-10-21 - 12:38:59 PM PDT
E
mail viewed by Lonell Butler ([email protected])
2024-10-21 - 1:10:01 PM PDT- IP address: 104.47.64.254
D
ocument e-signed by Lonell Butler ([email protected]) Signature Date: 2024-10-21 - 1:10:12 PM PDT - Time Source: server- IP address: 209.232.103.110 E
mail viewed by Felicia Bryant ([email protected])
2024-10-21 - 1:55:24 PM PDT- IP address: 104.47.65.254
D
ocument e-signed by Felicia Bryant ([email protected]) Signature Date: 2024-10-21 - 1:55:34 PM PDT - Time Source: server- IP address: 209.232.103.96 A
greement completed.
2024-10-21 - 1:55:34 PM PDT
Created:
By:
Status:
2024-10-21 (Pacific Daylight Time)
Timothy Green ([email protected])
Signed
Transaction ID:
CBJCHBCAABAAY1GCR02jooVQCDJVyeTBk6Ac2hdIu5j8