The codes and standards requiring elevator landing 2 way communication systems: Essential, No-Nonsense Guide (11 Code-Accurate Rules)

What These Systems Are and Why Codes Care

When a building emergency happens—fire, smoke, power outage, earthquake—some people can’t use stairs safely. That’s where accessible means of egress planning steps in. The idea is simple: if someone needs help getting out, the building must give them a safe place to wait and a reliable way to call for rescue assistance.

In the International Building Code (IBC), one of the most important “call for help” tools is the two-way communication system at elevator landings. This is not the phone inside the elevator car. It’s a system located at the elevator landing on certain floors so a person who needs help can quickly reach a fire command center or approved central control point. (Corada IBC/CBC excerpt reference)

Plain-English definition: “elevator landing two-way communication”

An elevator landing two-way communication system is a code-required rescue assistance communications point placed at the elevator landing on certain accessible floors. It must provide two-way voice communication (and have audible and visible signals) and, when the central point isn’t always staffed, it must be able to dial out to a monitoring location or 9-1-1. (Corada IBC/CBC excerpt reference)

How it ties to accessible means of egress and rescue assistance

In IBC terms, this requirement is tied to Accessible Means of Egress (Section 1009). Elevator landings are treated as key wayfinding and assistance locations—especially in multi-story buildings—because they’re often the most intuitive place someone will go if they can’t use stairs.

Where the IBC Actually Requires Elevator Landing Two-Way Communication

IBC Section 1009.8: the core trigger and where it applies

The core IBC rule is straightforward:

A two-way communication system (meeting IBC 1009.8.1 and 1009.8.2) must be provided at the landing serving each elevator or bank of elevators on each accessible floor that is one or more stories above or below the level of exit discharge. (Corada IBC/CBC excerpt reference)

“Each accessible floor” explained

This doesn’t mean every floor in every building. It means floors that are accessible (think: part of the accessible route and occupied/served spaces that must be accessible under the code). If a floor isn’t an accessible floor in the first place, it typically doesn’t trigger this specific landing requirement.

“One or more stories above or below exit discharge” explained

Exit discharge is the level where occupants exit to the exterior and reach a public way. If you have occupied accessible floors above that level—or below it (like a basement level)—IBC 1009.8 is trying to ensure that people who can’t use stairs still have a reliable way to call for help.

IBC 1009.8.1: what the system must do

IBC requires the system to connect each required location to a fire command center or central control point approved by the fire department. If that central point is not constantly attended, the system must have timed, automatic telephone dial-out that provides two-way communication with an approved supervising station or 9-1-1. The system must also include audible and visible signals. (Corada IBC/CBC excerpt reference)

IBC 1009.8.2: directions and location ID

IBC also requires posted directions adjacent to the system: how to use it, how to summon assistance, and written identification of the location. (Corada IBC/CBC excerpt reference)

How Areas of Refuge and Elevator Landings Interact (Avoiding Double-Coverage)

IBC 1009.6.5: areas of refuge two-way communication

IBC states that areas of refuge must have a two-way communication system that complies with the same requirements (1009.8.1 and 1009.8.2). (Corada IBC/CBC excerpt reference)

Design choice: landings vs. areas of refuge—what AHJs often expect

In real projects, designers often choose a strategy: put communications at elevator landings (where required), or place communications within designated areas of refuge (which can sometimes remove the need for elevator-landing devices via an exception—see Exception 1). The key is to avoid gaps. If you “trade” landing devices for area-of-refuge devices, make sure the areas of refuge are actually provided and located correctly.

NFPA 72 Deep Dive: Where the Fire Alarm/Signaling Rules Come In

NFPA 72 Chapter 24 and Section 24.10: rescue assistance two-way ECS

NFPA 72 includes Emergency Communications Systems in Chapter 24, and the 2022 edition lists Section 24.10: Two-Way Emergency Communications Systems for Rescue Assistance. This matters because elevator landing communication for rescue assistance is increasingly treated as a two-way emergency communications system, not a generic convenience intercom. (NFPA 72 (2022) product page / contents)

Listing/performance expectations (UL 2525) and why it matters

Industry guidance highlights that NFPA 72 (2022) requires systems used for area of refuge, stairway, elevator landing, and occupant evacuation elevator lobby rescue assistance communications to be listed to UL 2525 (or equivalent). (UL guidance on Area of Refuge Communication Systems)

Pathway survivability: when designers must think beyond “just an intercom”

Some jurisdictions and submittal documents call out survivability expectations alongside NFPA 72 emergency communications requirements, which can influence wiring methods and pathway design. (Example AHJ guidance document)

The Six IBC Exceptions—Fully Explained with Practical Scenarios

IBC 1009.8 includes six exceptions where elevator landing two-way communication systems are not required. (Corada IBC/CBC excerpt reference)

Exception 1: Communication is provided within areas of refuge (IBC 1009.6.5)

Code concept: If the two-way communication system is provided within areas of refuge per 1009.6.5, then it’s not required at the elevator landing.

Scenario: A high-rise office tower provides areas of refuge at each exit stair enclosure landing with compliant two-way rescue assistance call stations tied to the fire command center (or dial-out if not constantly attended). If those areas are properly designed and accepted, elevator-landing stations can be omitted.

Pitfall: Teams sometimes assume “the stair landing is an area of refuge” without documenting it. If the AHJ doesn’t accept the area-of-refuge layout, the exception may be denied.

Exception 2: Floors provided with ramps conforming to Section 1012

Code concept: If a floor is served by compliant ramps, the elevator landing two-way communication system is not required on that floor.

Scenario: A museum mezzanine is accessible via an interior ramp system meeting Section 1012. Because a ramp provides a non-elevator accessible means of egress, the landing two-way device may be unnecessary for that level.

Pitfall: If the “ramp solution” is not a true accessible means of egress (or doesn’t comply), the exception won’t hold.

Exception 3: Service elevators not part of the accessible means of egress (and not part of the required accessible route into the facility)

Code concept: Two-way communication isn’t required at landings serving only service elevators that are not designated as part of accessible means of egress and are not part of the required accessible route into the facility.

Scenario: A locked staff-only service elevator moves supplies between loading and storage, with no public or patient accessible route dependence. The landing two-way device can be excluded if documentation proves it’s not part of accessible egress/route.

Pitfall: If occupants commonly use it (even informally), plan review may reject the exception.

Exception 4: Freight elevators only

Code concept: Two-way communication is not required at landings serving only freight elevators.

Scenario: A warehouse freight elevator is intended solely for pallets/equipment and is not used as an occupant elevator. Landing communication points can be omitted.

Pitfall: If the “freight” elevator is actually used by people or resembles passenger service, the AHJ may treat it as serving occupants.

Exception 5: Private residence elevator

Code concept: Two-way communication is not required at landings serving a private residence elevator.

Scenario: A private multi-level dwelling includes a private elevator inside the unit, not serving the public. Landing devices aren’t required by this section.

Pitfall: A shared elevator in a multi-family building is typically not a “private residence elevator.”

Exception 6: Group I-2 or I-3 facilities

Code concept: Two-way communication at elevator landings is not required in Group I-2 or I-3 facilities.

Scenario (I-2): Hospitals often use defend-in-place and staff-assisted relocation protocols; communications and evacuation are managed differently.

Scenario (I-3): Detention/correctional occupancies require controlled movement and security-managed evacuation, making public call stations at landings less compatible with operations.

Common Design Pitfalls (and How to Avoid Plan Review Rejections)

• Mixing up elevator car emergency communication with landing communication: the elevator cab phone is not automatically the same as the required landing rescue assistance station.
• Forgetting the “central control point approved by the fire department” requirement: if the point isn’t constantly attended, dial-out becomes critical.
• Using non-listed equipment when the jurisdiction expects UL 2525 listing: many AHJs expect rescue assistance systems aligned with NFPA 72 Chapter 24 / 24.10.

Documentation Checklist for Permits and Inspections

• Identify locations at each elevator landing where required by IBC 1009.8 (or clearly document the exception used).
• Show audible + visible signaling behavior and posted directions/location identification adjacent to the device.
• Show the central control point and attendance status; if not constantly attended, specify timed automatic dial-out.
• Coordinate NFPA 72 emergency communications approach (commonly Chapter 24 / 24.10) and any local survivability requirements.

FAQs (Code-Practical Answers)

1) What IBC section requires elevator landing two-way communication systems?

IBC Section 1009.8 requires a two-way communication system at the landing serving each elevator or bank of elevators on each accessible floor one or more stories above or below exit discharge, unless an exception applies.

2) If we provide areas of refuge call boxes, do we still need elevator landing stations?

Often no—Exception 1 allows omitting landing stations if compliant two-way communication is provided within areas of refuge per 1009.6.5.

3) Does a ramp remove the need for elevator landing communication on that floor?

It can. Exception 2 says two-way communication systems aren’t required on floors provided with ramps conforming to Section 1012.

4) Are service or freight elevators exempt?

Sometimes. Exception 3 can apply to certain service elevators not part of accessible egress/route, and Exception 4 applies to landings serving only freight elevators.

5) How does NFPA 72 relate to these systems?

IBC sets the building requirement; NFPA 72 provides the emergency communications framework. NFPA 72 (2022) includes Chapter 24 and Section 24.10 for two-way rescue assistance ECS.

6) What’s the biggest reason these systems fail plan review?

Two common causes are misapplying exceptions without documentation and using intercom-like hardware that doesn’t meet AHJ expectations for rescue assistance system performance and listing.

Conclusion: A Simple Compliance Strategy That Holds Up

If you want a clean path to approval, start with IBC 1009.8 and map every accessible floor above/below exit discharge to an elevator landing (or bank) location. Then decide whether you’ll cover rescue assistance communication at the elevator landing or at areas of refuge—but don’t leave gaps. Finally, coordinate early with the AHJ on the central control point, monitoring/dial-out, and NFPA 72 expectations for rescue assistance two-way ECS (often aligned with Chapter 24 / 24.10 and UL 2525 listing).

External reference (NFPA page): NFPA 72 (2022) product page / contents

---