I'm looking for some advice regarding a staircase in a house I'm purchasing. It is a new build and the stairs isn't fully completed yet.
See the attached images of various angles of the stairs in the showhouse where I'm buying. My stairs is supposed to be the very same as this. As you can see the stairs has balusters (spindles) all the way up even though there is a wall behind them so they aren't really necessary.
I have also attached various angles of the stairs as it currently is in the house I'm buying. This is how much work the builders have currently done with it. I'm not keen on having the balusters as I'm looking to have a very simple, clean design in the house. I also see the area behind the balusters as being somewhere to potentially gather dust.
I've spoken to the builders about this. They've confirmed that the large posts at the top and bottom of the stairs need to remain in place. But what they can do is cut the large posts where I have the red marks on them in the attached image of my house. They'd do this at the top and bottom and then screw a floating handrail onto the wall (turning it in at the top and the bottom of the stairs).
What are the opinions of the people here? Would I be better with or without the balusters? Would it look ok if I had the floating handrail? I was also thinking of suggesting to the builders to keep the large post at the top of the stairs and running the floating handrail straight into that (I'd still cut the bottom one). Would this look better than cutting both? Or should I leave it the same as the showhouse?
Any advice and opinions are welcomed :-)
Non Sequitur
Jun 19, 18 1:20 pm
My advice is to get a better builder that can do what you want. Those unnecessary pickets, non wall-mounted handrail, and tiny staircase just scream incompetence.
senjohnblutarsky
Jun 19, 18 1:22 pm
My opinion is that whoever built it like the show house is a dumbass, and that should make you question the build quality of the remainder of the house.
You don't need a guard rail in a situation where there is no open side to the stair. All you need is a wall mounted handrail.
Fivescore
Jun 19, 18 1:26 pm
"They've confirmed that the large posts at the top and bottom of the stairs need to remain in place."
That's nonsense. The one at the bottom is completely superfluous. You do need some kind of guardrail at the very top where there is no wall, and somewhere for a handrail to terminate up there, but it doesn't necessarily need to terminate with a newel post.
If it were my house I'd do something sculpturaI with the handrail and guardrail as they turn the corner at the top of that flight - maybe have something fabricated in twisted/curved cast iron. If I wasn't an architect I might hire one to design that...
In any case I agree that you need a better builder.
JLC-1
Jun 19, 18 1:29 pm
is the stair in the very first picture 36" wide? or 34" at the tread? looks like a construction error to me, to have a gap between the stair and wall. dont buy that house.
citizen
Jun 19, 18 1:34 pm
This is one of the fun things about Archinect: weird details and lively commentary.
Michael24
Jun 19, 18 1:35 pm
Just to confirm, it's a building contractor that are doing an entire development of houses. The contract agreement is that the houses will be handover over finished to a spec the same as the showhouse. They have already agreed to let us change the bathrooms and have given us an alternative with the stairs. But it not a case that we could change builder or demand that they do it differently. So it's more a case of figuring the best way to do the stairs with the given options.
Fivescore
Jun 19, 18 1:54 pm
If you're going to take them at their word that they can't do something else/better, then: yes, you could have them cut the bottom post, and do a wall-mounted handrail. I'm not sure I'd do that though, because it's going to create another weirdness: The problem is going to be at the top, where you're still going to need some kind of guardrail - so if not the spindles there then something else - and you're going to need something at which to terminate the handrail, because it is required to go all the way to the top of the flight (it can't stop where the wall ends) - so if you cut that newel post you're going to need something else to do the same thing.
If you go with the wall mounted handrail instead of the spindles, then you may end up with a jog in the handrail near the top, where it switches from the wall to the guardrail system, because you've got a gap between the wall and the stringer, so unless you mount the wall mounted handrail out unusually far to align it with the newel posts and stringer (which would require wall brackets designed for that unusual distance) you're going to have to jog it over where it makes the switch from a wall-mounted handrail to the originally-intended system when you get to the end of the wall.
Non Sequitur
Jun 19, 18 1:55 pm
Don't buy spec developer houses and expect custom-level... or even average quality. Get this sub-standard builder to do whatever is cheapest and hire someone who knows what they are doing afterwards.
Michael24
Jun 19, 18 2:22 pm
@threesleeve, yeah I was thinking the same at the top of the stairs. That why I was thinking I might be better to keep the large post at the top and run the handrail straight into that, basically like in the showhouse except without the spindles. But at the bottom I would still cut away the post. Do you think even that would create a weirdness?
Fivescore
Jun 19, 18 3:03 pm
Yes, if you cut the post at the bottom but keep the one at the top, you'll have weirdness. That's why they did it the way they did in the first place. See, ordinarily a handrail is located so that there's about 1.5 inches between the wall and the inside of the handrail. That's what standard wall brackets are designed for. But you've got a gap between your wall and where the handrail would have to be to land at the upper post, that is much wider than 1.5 inches. That means that if you cut the bottom post you've got two options: the first is to find brackets that can span that really big gap in width, so that the handrail starts a few inches away from the wall and can be straight all the way up, and still lands at the post at the top. That's not always that easy to find those brackets, because the brackets need to be designed for the much longer moment arm. The other option is to jog the handrail at the point where it gets to the top of the wall - i.e. you'll need to add another newel post there, and then your handrail will jog from being 1.5 inches from the wall to being in the position to land at the posts up there - probably by adding a little horizontal run that connects the wall handrail to the posts handrail.
Fivescore
Jun 19, 18 3:16 pm
Also, you still need a guardrail (in addition to the handrail) at the side of the stair once it gets up past where the wall ends. So if you omit the spindles there, you're going to need to add something else for that little distance. You can't leave it open - there's a gap between the runs there that exceeds code minimum to leave it unguarded. So what are you planning to do if you omit spindles up there? Add a panel of some sort (metal, plexi, plywood...?) I think you may be better off just letting them build it the way it is in the model house, and then once you own it and they're gone, have the whole thing redone well in the future.
Miles Jaffe
Jun 19, 18 1:37 pm
Hire an inferior decorator, it's too late for an architect.
Rusty!
Jun 19, 18 1:45 pm
Carpenter is putting in these stairs and using a clunky design that doesn't require any knowledge beyond basic carpentry skills.
Wall mounted railing brackets need to meet International Residential Code for loading (200 pound concentrated load x 2.5 safety factor, I believe). This requires some pre-engineered railing components that have been laboratory tested, or requires very minimal "site engineering". These clunky wood railings are off the shelf pre-tested system that are impossible to screw up during installation.
randomised
Jun 19, 18 4:08 pm
Let them finish it as cheaply as possible and hire a professional afterwards to fix this eyesore.
Non Sequitur
Jun 19, 18 4:59 pm
That's what I wrote earlier. 8-)
Michael24
Jun 19, 18 4:55 pm
To be honest it'll probably cost quite a bit to have this looking perfect, and after buying the house and with other areas of it that I'll have to put money into before I can invest in changing around the stairs....it'll probably be at least 2 years before I can do anything else with it myself.
At the moment it won't cost me anything no matter which of the options that the builders offered me that I go with.
So the choices were:
1. Leave it as is and have the stairs like the showroom
2. Cut the Newel Posts at the top and the bottom of the of the stairs and attach a floating handrail to the wall, turning the rail in at the top and bottom
3. Cut the Newel Post at the bottom of the stairs, keep the post at the top, attach a floating handrail to the wall, turning the rail into the wall at the bottom and at the top bringing it straight into the top Newel Post
Which is these 3 options would everyone go with?
Non Sequitur
Jun 19, 18 5:02 pm
None are appropriate and the builders are not really doing you any favours here. Have you considered dropping the entire dumb posts deal and just put a wall mounted handrail on the opposite wall? Gosh, why do people put themselves through so much trouble for ugly... oh right, did not want to spend the money to do it right.
Gloominati
Jun 19, 18 5:03 pm
Option 1. The other options will be awkward and not code compliant. A handrail 3 inches or so out from the wall, mounted on a masonry wall by a not-great builder doesn't have much chance of lasting long anyway and then you're going to wish you hadn't cut the posts.
Michael24
Jun 19, 18 5:21 pm
But if I were to cut the newel post at the top and bottom of the stairs would the handrail still need to be 3 inches out from the wall?
Fivescore
Jun 19, 18 7:27 pm
You could pack out the wall, as others are suggesting. There's still an issue about what to do at the top when the wall ends and the handrail keeps going.
If you leave the wall as-is, and you don't fur out the wall, and you attach the handrail at the normal distance from the wall, then what are you going to do at the top, once the handrail goes past the end of the wall? I keep telling you that you've got a triangular opening between the handrail, stair stringer, and wall at the top that is too big to leave with no guardrail. If your handrail is not in line with the stringer, how are you planning to infill that triangle? It's not impossible to do - it's just going to look very weird.
Michael24
Jun 19, 18 5:20 pm
I know people might think I should be going with something different but its the only issue I have with the house right now. And the builders have made efforts to accommodate many requests I had. But for the stairs, I can do what I want once the house is handed over to me, but right now I need to decide which of the 3 options I posted to do and I'm really struggling to decide what to go with.
The basement stair is easy to fix by just cutting the newels out. You could also pack out the wall to follow the stair angle (36" high above the stringer), and put a solid rail with an oak rail cap. That would hide the newels, and give it a cleaner look and feel.
Not so sure about the upper. That double shot gun newel is a first.
How about trimming down one of the mid level landing posts, and then put a post cap on it? It could help create less of an eyesore by not having the dueling posts side by side at the same elevation.
At the end of the day, it's an easy fix, and you may just be the only homeowner on the block with a hand crafted hilly billy made stair case. ...Unless this thing happens to be their trademark. Did you happen to check the job site for empty cans Colt 45's? All signs point to either alcohol or drugs.
...Good luck. It should work out fine.
Quick Draw McGraw
Jun 19, 18 7:44 pm
Yes - on the lower level stairs, a solid rail wall would make the newels go away Some kind of horizontal white plank to follow the stringer angle, or a vertical wainscotting as you suggested.
The sheetrock above the rail cap only needs to be fastened to the concrete with furring strips ...assuming that energy code and insulation is not coming into consideration.
That top stair section is still a tricky one. Cutting one of the posts out to introduce a gooseneck (on the railing) is another way to avoid making it look like a design blunder.
Miles Jaffe
Jun 19, 18 8:20 pm
A little late for that.
OneLostArchitect
Jul 26, 19 8:17 am
a guard rail going down stars flanked by walls on both sides... has anyone ever been in a house before? Just buy a fucking handrail with wall mounting brackets!
Flatfish
Jul 26, 19 1:26 pm
The wall doesn't extend all the way to the top of the stair - it stops 3 or 4 treads before the top - so there is a portion that would need a guardrail unless the OP furred out the wall and extended it all the way to the top tread. At least, it would need a guardrail if IRC applies, but there are still some states that don't have any enforced residential code. But the thread is more than a year old though, so probably he did something, and we'll never know what.
OneLostArchitect
Jul 26, 19 1:49 pm
Yes i see that...but the handrail can span that easily. The wall looks to be there and there is no openings that I can see? I don’t see a need of a guard at all if what I’m seeing is correct
Medusa
Jul 27, 19 10:38 am
What in the actual fuck? The twin newel posts 1/4" apart, carpet on the stairs, weird switchbacks, the space between the guard rail and the wall that is going to become a black hole for shit you drop and can never retrieve... If these terrible decisions are in plain sight, imagine the horrors you can't see. OP, if it's not too late, do not buy this house. You will see shit start falling apart in under a year.
I'm looking for some advice regarding a staircase in a house I'm purchasing. It is a new build and the stairs isn't fully completed yet.
See the attached images of various angles of the stairs in the showhouse where I'm buying. My stairs is supposed to be the very same as this. As you can see the stairs has balusters (spindles) all the way up even though there is a wall behind them so they aren't really necessary.
I have also attached various angles of the stairs as it currently is in the house I'm buying. This is how much work the builders have currently done with it. I'm not keen on having the balusters as I'm looking to have a very simple, clean design in the house. I also see the area behind the balusters as being somewhere to potentially gather dust.
I've spoken to the builders about this. They've confirmed that the large posts at the top and bottom of the stairs need to remain in place. But what they can do is cut the large posts where I have the red marks on them in the attached image of my house. They'd do this at the top and bottom and then screw a floating handrail onto the wall (turning it in at the top and the bottom of the stairs).
What are the opinions of the people here? Would I be better with or without the balusters? Would it look ok if I had the floating handrail? I was also thinking of suggesting to the builders to keep the large post at the top of the stairs and running the floating handrail straight into that (I'd still cut the bottom one). Would this look better than cutting both? Or should I leave it the same as the showhouse?
Any advice and opinions are welcomed :-)
My advice is to get a better builder that can do what you want. Those unnecessary pickets, non wall-mounted handrail, and tiny staircase just scream incompetence.
My opinion is that whoever built it like the show house is a dumbass, and that should make you question the build quality of the remainder of the house.
You don't need a guard rail in a situation where there is no open side to the stair. All you need is a wall mounted handrail.
"They've confirmed that the large posts at the top and bottom of the stairs need to remain in place."
That's nonsense. The one at the bottom is completely superfluous. You do need some kind of guardrail at the very top where there is no wall, and somewhere for a handrail to terminate up there, but it doesn't necessarily need to terminate with a newel post.
If it were my house I'd do something sculpturaI with the handrail and guardrail as they turn the corner at the top of that flight - maybe have something fabricated in twisted/curved cast iron. If I wasn't an architect I might hire one to design that...
In any case I agree that you need a better builder.
is the stair in the very first picture 36" wide? or 34" at the tread? looks like a construction error to me, to have a gap between the stair and wall. dont buy that house.
This is one of the fun things about Archinect: weird details and lively commentary.
Just to confirm, it's a building contractor that are doing an entire development of houses. The contract agreement is that the houses will be handover over finished to a spec the same as the showhouse. They have already agreed to let us change the bathrooms and have given us an alternative with the stairs. But it not a case that we could change builder or demand that they do it differently. So it's more a case of figuring the best way to do the stairs with the given options.
If you're going to take them at their word that they can't do something else/better, then: yes, you could have them cut the bottom post, and do a wall-mounted handrail. I'm not sure I'd do that though, because it's going to create another weirdness: The problem is going to be at the top, where you're still going to need some kind of guardrail - so if not the spindles there then something else - and you're going to need something at which to terminate the handrail, because it is required to go all the way to the top of the flight (it can't stop where the wall ends) - so if you cut that newel post you're going to need something else to do the same thing.
If you go with the wall mounted handrail instead of the spindles, then you may end up with a jog in the handrail near the top, where it switches from the wall to the guardrail system, because you've got a gap between the wall and the stringer, so unless you mount the wall mounted handrail out unusually far to align it with the newel posts and stringer (which would require wall brackets designed for that unusual distance) you're going to have to jog it over where it makes the switch from a wall-mounted handrail to the originally-intended system when you get to the end of the wall.
Don't buy spec developer houses and expect custom-level... or even average quality. Get this sub-standard builder to do whatever is cheapest and hire someone who knows what they are doing afterwards.
@threesleeve, yeah I was thinking the same at the top of the stairs. That why I was thinking I might be better to keep the large post at the top and run the handrail straight into that, basically like in the showhouse except without the spindles. But at the bottom I would still cut away the post. Do you think even that would create a weirdness?
Yes, if you cut the post at the bottom but keep the one at the top, you'll have weirdness. That's why they did it the way they did in the first place. See, ordinarily a handrail is located so that there's about 1.5 inches between the wall and the inside of the handrail. That's what standard wall brackets are designed for. But you've got a gap between your wall and where the handrail would have to be to land at the upper post, that is much wider than 1.5 inches. That means that if you cut the bottom post you've got two options: the first is to find brackets that can span that really big gap in width, so that the handrail starts a few inches away from the wall and can be straight all the way up, and still lands at the post at the top. That's not always that easy to find those brackets, because the brackets need to be designed for the much longer moment arm. The other option is to jog the handrail at the point where it gets to the top of the wall - i.e. you'll need to add another newel post there, and then your handrail will jog from being 1.5 inches from the wall to being in the position to land at the posts up there - probably by adding a little horizontal run that connects the wall handrail to the posts handrail.
Also, you still need a guardrail (in addition to the handrail) at the side of the stair once it gets up past where the wall ends. So if you omit the spindles there, you're going to need to add something else for that little distance. You can't leave it open - there's a gap between the runs there that exceeds code minimum to leave it unguarded. So what are you planning to do if you omit spindles up there? Add a panel of some sort (metal, plexi, plywood...?) I think you may be better off just letting them build it the way it is in the model house, and then once you own it and they're gone, have the whole thing redone well in the future.
Hire an inferior decorator, it's too late for an architect.
Carpenter is putting in these stairs and using a clunky design that doesn't require any knowledge beyond basic carpentry skills.
Wall mounted railing brackets need to meet International Residential Code for loading (200 pound concentrated load x 2.5 safety factor, I believe). This requires some pre-engineered railing components that have been laboratory tested, or requires very minimal "site engineering". These clunky wood railings are off the shelf pre-tested system that are impossible to screw up during installation.
Let them finish it as cheaply as possible and hire a professional afterwards to fix this eyesore.
That's what I wrote earlier. 8-)
To be honest it'll probably cost quite a bit to have this looking perfect, and after buying the house and with other areas of it that I'll have to put money into before I can invest in changing around the stairs....it'll probably be at least 2 years before I can do anything else with it myself.
At the moment it won't cost me anything no matter which of the options that the builders offered me that I go with.
So the choices were:
1. Leave it as is and have the stairs like the showroom
2. Cut the Newel Posts at the top and the bottom of the of the stairs and attach a floating handrail to the wall, turning the rail in at the top and bottom
3. Cut the Newel Post at the bottom of the stairs, keep the post at the top, attach a floating handrail to the wall, turning the rail into the wall at the bottom and at the top bringing it straight into the top Newel Post
Which is these 3 options would everyone go with?
None are appropriate and the builders are not really doing you any favours here. Have you considered dropping the entire dumb posts deal and just put a wall mounted handrail on the opposite wall? Gosh, why do people put themselves through so much trouble for ugly... oh right, did not want to spend the money to do it right.
Option 1. The other options will be awkward and not code compliant. A handrail 3 inches or so out from the wall, mounted on a masonry wall by a not-great builder doesn't have much chance of lasting long anyway and then you're going to wish you hadn't cut the posts.
But if I were to cut the newel post at the top and bottom of the stairs would the handrail still need to be 3 inches out from the wall?
You could pack out the wall, as others are suggesting. There's still an issue about what to do at the top when the wall ends and the handrail keeps going.
If you leave the wall as-is, and you don't fur out the wall, and you attach the handrail at the normal distance from the wall, then what are you going to do at the top, once the handrail goes past the end of the wall? I keep telling you that you've got a triangular opening between the handrail, stair stringer, and wall at the top that is too big to leave with no guardrail. If your handrail is not in line with the stringer, how are you planning to infill that triangle? It's not impossible to do - it's just going to look very weird.
I know people might think I should be going with something different but its the only issue I have with the house right now. And the builders have made efforts to accommodate many requests I had. But for the stairs, I can do what I want once the house is handed over to me, but right now I need to decide which of the 3 options I posted to do and I'm really struggling to decide what to go with.
There is a solution in another thread here: https://archinect.com/forum/th...
Twisty!
The basement stair is easy to fix by just cutting the newels out. You could also pack out the wall to follow the stair angle (36" high above the stringer), and put a solid rail with an oak rail cap. That would hide the newels, and give it a cleaner look and feel.
Not so sure about the upper. That double shot gun newel is a first.
How about trimming down one of the mid level landing posts, and then put a post cap on it? It could help create less of an eyesore by not having the dueling posts side by side at the same elevation.
At the end of the day, it's an easy fix, and you may just be the only homeowner on the block with a hand crafted hilly billy made stair case. ...Unless this thing happens to be their trademark. Did you happen to check the job site for empty cans Colt 45's? All signs point to either alcohol or drugs.
...Good luck. It should work out fine.
Yes - on the lower level stairs, a solid rail wall would make the newels go away Some kind of horizontal white plank to follow the stringer angle, or a vertical wainscotting as you suggested.
The sheetrock above the rail cap only needs to be fastened to the concrete with furring strips ...assuming that energy code and insulation is not coming into consideration.
That top stair section is still a tricky one. Cutting one of the posts out to introduce a gooseneck (on the railing) is another way to avoid making it look like a design blunder.
A little late for that.
a guard rail going down stars flanked by walls on both sides... has anyone ever been in a house before? Just buy a fucking handrail with wall mounting brackets!
The wall doesn't extend all the way to the top of the stair - it stops 3 or 4 treads before the top - so there is a portion that would need a guardrail unless the OP furred out the wall and extended it all the way to the top tread. At least, it would need a guardrail if IRC applies, but there are still some states that don't have any enforced residential code. But the thread is more than a year old though, so probably he did something, and we'll never know what.
Yes i see that...but the handrail can span that easily. The wall looks to be there and there is no openings that I can see? I don’t see a need of a guard at all if what I’m seeing is correct
What in the actual fuck? The twin newel posts 1/4" apart, carpet on the stairs, weird switchbacks, the space between the guard rail and the wall that is going to become a black hole for shit you drop and can never retrieve... If these terrible decisions are in plain sight, imagine the horrors you can't see. OP, if it's not too late, do not buy this house. You will see shit start falling apart in under a year.