See anything wrong with the stair rail?

[Jeffrey R. Jonas]

Originally Posted by belliott

OK here is definition of "landing"

The width of each landing shall not be less than
the stairway served. Every landing shall have
a minimum dimension of 36 inches (914 mm)
measured in the direction of travel
Attachment 44181

So if those winders are at least 36" wide would they not be called landings?

No. There is not 36 inches in the direction of travel.

The requirement is: at least 36 inches wide and at least 36 inches in the direction of travel. So, for the sake of arguement... 36" X 36" minimum.

[Bob Elliott]

Originally Posted by jjonas

No. There is not 36 inches in the direction of travel.

The requirement is: at least 36 inches wide and at least 36 inches in the direction of travel. So, for the sake of arguement... 36" X 36" minimum.

OK ,so I guess the handrail needs to be extended.
Here is one I had today.


So just wanted to be 100% sure on this.

[Jeffrey R. Jonas]

Now you got it Bob! Yes, needs continuous handrail.

[Jeffrey R. Jonas]

Originally Posted by lkage

See page 6:

http://www.arcways.com/pdfs/IRC2006.pdf

Thanks Larry! That will come in very handy with a few remodelers I know.

[Marcel R. Cyr]

The railing needs to follow the risers around and down to the main floor.
That one went to far, it should have stopped at the last riser of the main stair and then followed the pitch of the winder stairs.

[Joe Funderburk, CMI]

Originally Posted by belliott

OK ,so I guess the handrail needs to be extended.
Here is one I had today.
Attachment 44185

So just wanted to be 100% sure on this.

Right, Bob. That rail stops at least 2 treads too short. Those are wider stair treads, not landings.

[Bob Elliott]

Originally Posted by jfunderburk

Right, Bob. That rail stops at least 2 treads too short. Those are wider stair treads, not landings.

Hoping there might be a cheat involved as I see them with missing handrails at over half where there is a turn and then just a couple steps.

Always called it out before but mentioned this thread earlier to my client and said I might just change it to (recommend).

Everything OK if I change my mind though as it is my third inspection with him.

[Jeffrey R. Jonas]

Joe, what year is the home, and when was the reno done? How far from the bottom step to the (entrance?) door?

[Joe Funderburk, CMI]

Originally Posted by jjonas

Joe, what year is the home, and when was the reno done? How far from the bottom step to the (entrance?) door?

Townhome. About 5 years old. The door was probably 2 to 3 feet from the bottom tread.

Home age doens't matter to me. Stairs are the most dangerous thing in a home. I always try to imaging my 78 year old mother using the stairs....look at them from the perspective of an elderly, unsteady person.

[Jeffrey R. Jonas]

Originally Posted by jfunderburk

Townhome. About 5 years old. The door was probably 2 to 3 feet from the bottom tread.

Home age doens't matter to me. Stairs are the most dangerous thing in a home. I always try to imaging my 78 year old mother using the stairs....look at them from the perspective of an elderly, unsteady person.

I understand. I was just trying to look at the picture, and trying to understand why a correct landing was not installed. I don't care if allowed, those types of stairs are damned dangerous, especially for the elderly. If the door was 3 feet away from the current botton stair, they "may" have had room for a landing. I wonder if they used the winding staircase to gain more height for the window to floor clearance.

[Joseph Hagarty, CMI]

Originally Posted by dandersen

So if your enforcing the rail to todays standards, go for the treads too...

That taint no 6" at the nosing on step #3...

noticed that also.
If 5 years, stairs may be improper.
Code in your area may vary...