Sample reference packet

What the free PDF reference packet includes

This page previews the same sections used by the downloadable PDF. The sample is generated from one homeowner input set, so the conclusion, calculations, risks, questions, and citations all change when the user measurements change.

Personalized decision

Plain-English decision

This report reviews a basement stair in Austin, TX using a 95 inch floor-to-floor rise and 86 inch clear floor length. The current decision is do not build from these numbers yet, with L-shaped stair as the best normal-layout starting point.

Do not build from these numbers yet. The current numbers create at least one serious fit or baseline-code risk. Get the missing dimensions or a revised layout before cutting, buying, or scheduling work.

irc-baseline-2026-07-01Baseline risk onlyInput snapshot savedProfessional PDF packet

PDF reference contents

What This Free Reference Packet Includes

The PDF is a free planning aid, not permit approval, local code approval, engineering advice, or a stamped construction drawing.

One-page decision summaryHigh risk

A one-page decision summary that says whether to revise, measure more, or ask for missing confirmation before work starts. Boundary: It is a planning summary, not local code approval or permission to build. Live screen: Live verdict: High risk.

Inputs: floor-to-floor height: 95"; available run: 86"Sources: Homeowner report packetProfessional question: Use this section to decide whether the current stair plan needs revision.

Stair calculation sheetHigh risk

Riser count, riser height, tread depth, total run, cut angle, stringer length, and L-shaped stair footprint are saved together. Boundary: It is a geometry record from entered measurements, not a stamped construction drawing. Live screen: 13 risers and 7 3/16" treads are visible on the page.

Inputs: floor-to-floor height: 95"; available run: 86"Sources: Stair geometry calculationProfessional question: Use this section to decide whether the current stair plan needs revision.

Source-cited risk registerHigh risk

Each warning includes the triggering input, threshold, source citation, and rule version used to create the conclusion. Boundary: It flags baseline risk only; local amendments and final inspection remain outside the tool. Live screen: 2 high and 4 attention warnings are previewed.

Inputs: floor-to-floor height: 95"; available run: 86"Sources: Source-cited rule ledgerProfessional question: Use this section to decide whether the current stair plan needs revision.

Contractor/inspector question sheetHigh risk

6 project-specific questions are generated from the actual risks, layout gaps, and local-verification boundary. Boundary: The questions help the homeowner ask better; they do not replace a qualified professional's answer. Live screen: A few next questions appear in the live preview.

Inputs: floor-to-floor height: 95"; available run: 86"Sources: Homeowner report packetProfessional question: Use these questions before construction, purchase, or plan approval.

Shareable PDF recordHigh risk

A portable PDF keeps the input snapshot, rule version, citations, layout notes, and report boundary in one file. Boundary: It is not permit approval, engineering approval, or a guarantee that an inspector will approve the stair. Live screen: The browser view changes as the numbers change.

Inputs: floor-to-floor height: 95"; available run: 86"Sources: Homeowner report packetProfessional question: Use this section to decide whether the current stair plan needs revision.

Input snapshot

Input Snapshot

These are the exact homeowner inputs the report used.

Project typebasement

Floor-to-floor height95"

Available run86"

Stair width35"

Room width available108"

Headroom78"

Opening length70"

Landing depth32"

Calculation sheet

Calculated Stair Layout

This page turns the field measurements into a first-pass stair geometry and a simple drawing.

Recommended normal layoutL-shaped stair

Risers13

Riser height7 5/16"

Treads12

Tread depth7 3/16"

Total run86"

Angle47.8 deg

Stringer length128 1/8"

First layout marks10 1/4", 20 1/2", 30 3/4", 40 15/16", 51 3/16", ...

Reasoning chain

How StairSolver Reached This Conclusion

This reasoning chain is written for a homeowner first, then backed by calculation and source references.

1. Field inputHigh risk

The homeowner entered a basement stair with 95 inches of rise and 86 inches of straight floor length. In plain English: this is how high the stair must climb and how much floor run is available before a wall, door, or landing conflict.

Inputs: project type: basement; floor-to-floor rise: 95"; clear floor length: 86"Sources: Homeowner input snapshotProfessional question: Are these finished dimensions measured from finished floor to finished floor and clear obstruction to clear obstruction?

2. Stair geometry calculationHigh risk

Those inputs calculate to 13 risers, 7 5/16" riser height, 12 treads, 7 3/16" tread depth, 86" total run, and a 47.8 degree stair angle. The normal-layout comparison points first to L-shaped stair.

Inputs: riser count: 13; tread depth: 7 3/16"; stair angle: 47.8 degSources: Stair geometry calculationProfessional question: Can the contractor show these dimensions in the stair layout before framing or cutting stringers?

3. Baseline comparisonHigh risk

The calculated stair is compared against the source-cited baseline checks. This run triggered 2 high-risk items and 4 attention items, including references such as 2021 IRC R311.7.5.2, Planning heuristic, not code, 2021 IRC R311.7.2, 2021 IRC R311.7.1, 2021 IRC R311.7.6, 2021 IRC R311.7.5.1, FTC home improvement contractor guidance, 2021 IRC R311.7.8 and R312.

Inputs: available run; rise/run relationship; headroom; ceiling or floor opening length; stair width; landing depthSources: 2021 IRC R311.7.5.2, Planning heuristic, not code, 2021 IRC R311.7.2, 2021 IRC R311.7.1, 2021 IRC R311.7.6, 2021 IRC R311.7.5.1, FTC home improvement contractor guidance, 2021 IRC R311.7.8 and R312Professional question: Which flagged items will be corrected in the layout, and which items need local authority confirmation?

4. Practical decisionHigh risk

Because at least one source-cited or fit-related warning is high risk, this stair is not ready to build from these numbers. Treat the layout as a pre-check that needs revised dimensions or written confirmation before money, materials, or scheduling.

Inputs: verdict: High risk; rule version: irc-baseline-2026-07-01Sources: Decision packet and evidence traceProfessional question: What revised layout, written dimension set, or local confirmation is needed before work starts?

Risk register

Risk Register

Each warning below is tied to the user input, a calculation, and a cited source.

Treads may be too shallowHigh risk

7.17" treads are below the common residential baseline of 10".

Inputs: available run: 86"; recommended tread depth: 7.17"Sources: 2021 IRC R311.7.5.2Professional question: Can this stair get more run, a landing, or another layout so the tread depth is not too shallow?

The stair may feel steepNeeds review

47.8 degrees is steeper than a comfortable residential target.

Inputs: floor-to-floor height: 95"; total run: 86"; calculated angle: 47.8 degSources: Planning heuristic, not codeProfessional question: What layout change would reduce the stair angle without shrinking the tread?

Headroom may be shortHigh risk

78" headroom is below the common 80" baseline.

Inputs: provided headroom: 78"Sources: 2021 IRC R311.7.2Professional question: Where is the tightest headroom point, and how will it be verified before framing?

Opening may be too shortNeeds review

Ceiling or floor opening length is 70"; calculated stair run is 86".

Inputs: opening length: 70"; calculated stair run: 86"Sources: 2021 IRC R311.7.2Professional question: Can the plan show how the stair opening preserves headroom across the calculated stair run?

Stair width looks tightNeeds review

35" width is below the common 36" residential target.

Inputs: provided stair width: 35"Sources: 2021 IRC R311.7.1Professional question: Will finished wall surfaces or handrails reduce the clear width further?

Landing space looks tightNeeds review

32" landing depth is below the common 36" target.

Inputs: provided landing depth: 32"Sources: 2021 IRC R311.7.6Professional question: Can the landing depth be increased before the stair begins or turns?

Question sheet

Project Question Sheet

These are contractor- and inspector-facing questions. They use precise stair scope language, but each item is tied back to a homeowner-readable risk.

Professional scope question: rise/run scheduleHigh risk

Please confirm the finished tread depth, riser height, total run, clear stair width, headroom path, landing depth, stringer layout, handrail/guard scope, and permit responsibility in the written scope of work.

Inputs: calculated tread depth: 7 3/16"; calculated riser height: 7 5/16"Sources: Written scope and stair geometry calculationProfessional question: Will the written scope list finished tread depth, riser height, total run, clear width, headroom, landing, stringer layout, handrail/guard scope, and permit responsibility?

Ask about: Treads may be too shallowHigh risk

7.17" treads are below the common residential baseline of 10".

Ask about: The stair may feel steepNeeds review

47.8 degrees is steeper than a comfortable residential target.

Ask about: Headroom may be shortHigh risk

78" headroom is below the common 80" baseline.

Inputs: provided headroom: 78"Sources: 2021 IRC R311.7.2Professional question: Where is the tightest headroom point, and how will it be verified before framing?

Ask about: Opening may be too shortNeeds review

Ceiling or floor opening length is 70"; calculated stair run is 86".

Inputs: opening length: 70"; calculated stair run: 86"Sources: 2021 IRC R311.7.2Professional question: Can the plan show how the stair opening preserves headroom across the calculated stair run?

Ask about: Stair width looks tightNeeds review

35" width is below the common 36" residential target.

Inputs: provided stair width: 35"Sources: 2021 IRC R311.7.1Professional question: Will finished wall surfaces or handrails reduce the clear width further?

Ask about: Landing space looks tightNeeds review

32" landing depth is below the common 36" target.

Inputs: provided landing depth: 32"Sources: 2021 IRC R311.7.6Professional question: Can the landing depth be increased before the stair begins or turns?

Source citations

Source Citations

Public source links used by the report. Some sources may require ICC access for full tools or enhanced features.

Residential stairs technical bulletin exampleReport item

Local amendment warning. Publisher: New York Department of State. Version: irc-baseline-2026-07-01. URL: https://dos.ny.gov/system/files/documents/2019/10/tb-1005-rcnys-residential-exit-doors-stairs-and.pdf

Sources: Residential stairs technical bulletin exampleProfessional question: Used to explain why StairSolver reports say baseline risk rather than local code approval.

2021 IRC R311.7.5.2Report item

Residential tread depth baseline. Publisher: International Code Council. Version: irc-baseline-2026-07-01. URL: https://codes.iccsafe.org/content/IRC2021P2/chapter-3-building-planning#IRC2021P2_Pt03_Ch03_SecR311.7.5.2

Sources: 2021 IRC R311.7.5.2Professional question: Flags tread depth below 10 inches.

Planning heuristic, not codeReport item

Stair steepness comfort heuristic. Publisher: StairSolver. Version: irc-baseline-2026-07-01. URL: /sources

Sources: Planning heuristic, not codeProfessional question: Flags stair angles above 37 degrees as attention items.

2021 IRC R311.7.2Report item

Residential stair headroom baseline. Publisher: International Code Council. Version: irc-baseline-2026-07-01. URL: https://codes.iccsafe.org/content/IRC2021P2/chapter-3-building-planning#IRC2021P2_Pt03_Ch03_SecR311.7.2

Sources: 2021 IRC R311.7.2Professional question: Flags headroom below 80 inches.

2021 IRC R311.7.2Report item

Stair opening and headroom path check. Publisher: International Code Council. Version: irc-baseline-2026-07-01. URL: https://codes.iccsafe.org/content/IRC2021P2/chapter-3-building-planning#IRC2021P2_Pt03_Ch03_SecR311.7.2

Sources: 2021 IRC R311.7.2Professional question: Flags opening length shorter than the calculated stair run as a planning prompt, not a full headroom approval.

2021 IRC R311.7.1Report item

Residential stair width baseline. Publisher: International Code Council. Version: irc-baseline-2026-07-01. URL: https://codes.iccsafe.org/content/IRC2021P2/chapter-3-building-planning#IRC2021P2_Pt03_Ch03_SecR311.7.1

Sources: 2021 IRC R311.7.1Professional question: Flags expected finished width below 36 inches.

2021 IRC R311.7.6Report item

Residential landing baseline. Publisher: International Code Council. Version: irc-baseline-2026-07-01. URL: https://codes.iccsafe.org/content/IRC2021P2/chapter-3-building-planning#IRC2021P2_Pt03_Ch03_SecR311.7.6

Sources: 2021 IRC R311.7.6Professional question: Flags provided landing depth below 36 inches.

Boundary

Report Boundary

The report is a baseline planning aid, not local code approval, engineering approval, or a permit decision. StairSolver reports are homeowner planning aids. They are not licensed engineering approval, stamped construction drawings, permit approval, or a guarantee that an inspector will approve the stair.