Today's stair "issue"

[Jeffrey R. Pope]

New construction inspection today in Los Angeles. . .

[Russel Ray]

What am I missing?

[Shawn Rowe]

Originally Posted by rray

What am I missing?

Looks to be 4" risers!

These would be great for toddlers

[Russel Ray]

Ah-ha.
I was focused on that nice flat area at the right where I could put some potted plants. Glad that's not the issue here. That was close.

[rwand1]

Shag carpeting on stairs is a trip hazard. Its also not fashionable.

[nwagner]

Is shag carpeting back in fashion? Personally, I prefer my shag carpeting in avocado green.

[Barry Adair]

4 possible issues but i'm not up on cali. code

tread nosing too thick
look at the measuring tape 8 1/2" rise
wall require guard railing
hand rail is incomplete

[Jeffrey R. Pope]

Originally Posted by badair

4 possible issues but i'm not up on cali. code

tread nosing too thick
look at the measuring tape 8 1/2" rise
wall require guard railing
hand rail is incomplete

I'm not aware of any "nosing thickness" requirement in the CPC (only in the IRC).

The measurements were a bit rough (tape pressure on the thick carpet) but we're allowed 8" in CA.

Wall gaurd or rail was incomplete, which is what the tape was referencing.

Handrail was incomplete based on my interpretation, but not that of the builder. We'll see where this falls in the next few days.

Originally Posted by rray

Ah-ha.
I was focused on that nice flat area at the right where I could put some potted plants. Glad that's not the issue here. That was close.

Actually, that was the issue that is indisputable. The guard wall or guard rail is required to be at least 34" high from the walking surface of the treads and landings.

The first four steps above the landing were lacking their required protection.

[whandley]

I think you're correct Jeff on each of those issues. Hand rail is required if more than (1) riser. Guard railing is required at both sides of the stair well with hand railing elevation of 34-38".

I normally list those items as an "unsafe condition" and try to explain to the parties involved what hazards are at issue.

The builder however always says "It was signed off by the AHJ". As you and I both know, California is filled with construction defect litigation issues all of which were signed off at some point in time "By the AHJ"

Good Luck!

[Russel Ray]

Originally Posted by whandley

Hand rail is required if more than (1) riser. Guard railing is required at both sides of the stair well with hand railing elevation of 34-38".

Really?

I don't believe I have ever found two handrails in a residential stairway in any of the states that I have worked in.

In Jeff's picture, the handrail is going to go on the opposite wall so that I can put some nice potted plants on the other side.

[Jeffrey R. Pope]

Originally Posted by rray

I don't believe I have ever found two handrails in a residential stairway in any of the states that I have worked in.

Two rails are not required, however, guards are required on both sides.

Two hand rails are required only when the width of the stairway exceeds a specific dimension, however, I believe there is an exception with regards to single family residential dwellings (I can check on that if anyone is interested).

There is no exception for guard rails/walls.

[Russel Ray]

I'm not seeing an issue with your pictures yet. Can you explain further? Thanks.

[Jeffrey R. Pope]

The issue is in the wall where you want to put your potted plants.

The top of the guard wall is only 13" above the walking surface of the tread (as shown in the photo) where it is required to be a minimum of 34".

[Jeffrey R. Pope]

These dimensions are required to be a minimum of 34"

[Barry Adair]

+ or -13 1/4" + or - 21 1/2 " next step down is + or - 29"-30" all are constiantly below the required railing height

left wall handrail is absent

bythe way those are pot plants not potted plants on that rail put down the bottle and look closely grin