# Is this legal?



## conarb (Jan 16, 2011)

I could have sworn  that there was something in the code requiring  "smooth" transitions, but I looked and can't find it, maybe it's ADA? It does not appear to be 1½" off the wall, and the profile appears to be an older pre-graspability profile, but I am wondering why I am under the impression that transitions had to be "smooth"?



> Originally Posted by *2010 CRC* _*R311.7.7.2 Continuity*__.  Handrails for stairways shall be continuous for the full length of the  flight, from a point directly above the top riser of the flight to a  point directly above the lowest riser of the flight. Handrail ends shall  be returned or shall terminate in newel posts or safety terminals.  Handrails adjacent to a wall shall have a space of not less than 11/2  inch (38 mm) between the wall and the handrails._


View attachment 1475

​
View attachment 1475


[/QUOTE]/monthly_2011_01/rail_smooth.jpg.361a969314bb50d9324782209f435152.jpg


----------



## Bootleg (Jan 17, 2011)

Is the height of the handrail 34" to 38" ?


----------



## Pcinspector1 (Jan 18, 2011)

Conarb,

Can't find "smooth"

If that's a landing (not in the picture but assumed) is'nt that the end of the flight of steps, and the rail would start again at the next flight? Just asking.

On a straight run with no flight stop (landing) it would have to be continous!

pc1


----------



## MarkRandall (Jan 18, 2011)

Looks like an inside handrail condition..., so it needs to be continuous. It is continuous, but just about the worst hatchet job I've seen. It very well may meet the code, though.


----------



## conarb (Jan 18, 2011)

I wonder where I got the idea that it had to be 'smooth" so a person could run their hand down it without stopping?


----------



## brudgers (Jan 18, 2011)

Going with that oak railing sure adds a touch of class


----------



## fatboy (Jan 19, 2011)

CA.......Maybe you have equated smooth with continous......the pic is continuos........but  not smooth....


----------



## Pcinspector1 (Jan 19, 2011)

brudgers?

Mark,

I thought only one handrail was required on a set of steps and your post makes reference to the handrail being on the inside. Please direct me to that part of the code, I'am not aware of the inside or outside difference requirement.

Q. If I have a split entry home with an entry platform stairs going up from the platform and down would it be code to have handrails at the outer walls or be required at the center wall and be continuous as you stated "inside"


----------



## MarkRandall (Jan 19, 2011)

Pc,

You have a choice to put the rail on the inside condition or the outside condition. In this example the hand rail is located on the inside condition. I doubt the residential code makes mention of inside condition, but I'll do a quick check in the code and update this post.

Update:

Looking at the code, I was surprised that the IRC does not require any extension of any kind at the top and bottom risers, so it can stop and return to the wall directly above the riser (I only do a small amount of IRC work and have always provided 6" extensions - I guess I "over design"). This picture does not show what the stairs are doing below. If this is a landing condition (not any winder treads), technically the rail would not have to be continuous. It could stop at the top riser of one flight and start again at the bottom riser of the next flight.

IBC is a little more detailed and my inside-outside terminology comes from the last part of this section:

"1012.5 Handrail extensions. Handrails shall return to a wall,

guard or thewalking surface or shall be continuous to the handrail

of an adjacent stair flight or ramp run."

The reference to inside handrail can be found in ANSI and is not applicable to SFR:

505.3 Continuity. Handrails shall be continuous

within the full length of each stair flight or ramp run.

Inside handrails on switchback or dogleg stairs or

ramps shall be continuous between flights or runs.


----------



## mark handler (Jan 19, 2011)

CALIFORNIA

Subchapter 7. General Industry Safety Orders

Group 1. General Physical Conditions and Structures Orders

Article 2. Standard Specifications

d) A handrail shall consist of a lengthwise member mounted directly on a wall or partition by means of brackets attached to the lower side of the handrail so as to offer no obstruction to *a smooth surface along the top and both sides of the handrail*. The handrail shall be designed to provide a grasping surface to avoid the person using it from falling. The spacing of brackets shall not exceed 8 feet.


----------



## conarb (Jan 19, 2011)

Mark:

To what occupancies (or structures) does "Subchapter 7. General Industry Safety Orders" apply?


----------



## Pcinspector1 (Jan 19, 2011)

MarkRandall, Thanks for working with me on this, I have a very large residential subdivision on the horizon and a bit rusty on the residential requirements.

Conarb, I guess it's a California thing according to the handler!

brudgers, is that your dog or the neighbors?


----------



## brudgers (Jan 19, 2011)

Pcinspector1 said:
			
		

> brudgers?


The Oak is just turd polish.


----------



## mtlogcabin (Jan 19, 2011)

1997 UBC Section 1003.3.3.6

The handgrip portion of handrails shall not be less than 11/4 inches (32 mm) nor more than 2 inches (51 mm) in cross­sectional dimension or the shape shall provide an equivalent grip­ping surface. The handgrip portion of handrails shall have a smooth surface with no sharp corners. Handrails projecting from a wall shall have a space of not less than 11/2 inches (38 mm) between the wall and the handrail.


----------



## mark handler (Jan 19, 2011)

conarb said:
			
		

> Mark:To what occupancies (or structures) does "Subchapter 7. General Industry Safety Orders" apply?


*Only where The Division of Occupational Safety and Health, better known as Cal/OSHA, protects workers and the public from safety hazards through its Occupational Safety and Health.*


----------



## conarb (Jan 19, 2011)

Thanks Mark, that answers my question, even in a residence where the rails go in at the end of a job there are still workers present, and I guess CalOSHA protects domestic help working within a home after it's built, as well as tradesmen doing remodeling/repair work after it's built.


----------



## EgressMonster (Jan 25, 2011)

conarb said:
			
		

> I could have sworn  that there was something in the code requiring  "smooth" transitions, but I looked and can't find it, maybe it's ADA? It does not appear to be 1½" off the wall, and the profile appears to be an older pre-graspability profile, but I am wondering why I am under the impression that transitions had to be "smooth"?
> 
> _
> View attachment 721
> ...


A photo of the entire area would be helpful… It appears that since the stair is changing direction; there may be a landing. IF there is a landing there is NO need to have “continuous” rail from 1 stair “flight” to the next “flight”.

As far as the word “smooth” is concerned, the rail isn’t interrupted by anything; such as a newel post… I don’t believe the definition of smooth is intended to be in the artistic sense (a smooth line).


----------



## georgia plans exam (Jan 25, 2011)

I don't see a problem with that handrail. Welcome to the forum, EgressMonster.

GPE


----------



## NH09 (Jan 27, 2011)

I have always had an issue with this part of the IRC. The wording does state "continuous" which would require the situation seen in the picture - It is awkward, difficult to fabricate, and defies common sense. Had the carpenter put the railing on the opposite side they could have had the railing interrupted by the landing (according to the IRC), but there could be windows in the way, or another obstruction not seen in the picture prohibiting them from doing so. Back when I was carpenter I had a similar situation where there was only one side of the stairway where the railing could be placed and it was interrupted by a jog in the wall - the final railing looked horrible and was awkward to use, but it met code. Now I try to catch guys in the framing process so we can avoid railings like the one in the picture. It's not pretty, but that railing would meet code around here.


----------



## Yankee (Jan 27, 2011)

"continuous for the full length of the flight" only, , can't see the rest but this is either a landing, which would break up two flights in which case this pretzel could be untwisted, , , or a winder in which case, , , there is no hope.


----------



## Pcinspector1 (Jan 27, 2011)

Yankee, thats how I enforce it, if theres a break (landing) then a new stair set starts, with another handrail.


----------



## EgressMonster (Jan 27, 2011)

Yankee said:
			
		

> "continuous for the full length of the flight" only, , can't see the rest but this is either a landing, which would break up two flights in which case this pretzel could be untwisted, , , or a winder in which case, , , there is no hope.


Technically, It can be done with or without winders; just not as a cost effective solution.
​


----------

