# handrail extension at the top landing



## michael2020 (Jun 4, 2020)

code masters, I have a question on handrail extension. Per the building code, the handrail shall extend 12" the same direction at the top landing unless there's another flight of stair.

Q: Do I have to extend the handrail for 12" the same direction of the handrail or I can wrap around on the side?

Thanks everyone


----------



## RLGA (Jun 4, 2020)

Is this a new stair installation or renovation of an existing stair?


----------



## michael2020 (Jun 4, 2020)

this is a new building.


----------



## RLGA (Jun 4, 2020)

michael2020 said:


> this is a new building.


Then, no, the handrail must extend 12 inches in the direction of the handrail. If this were an alteration, the extension would not be required if it projected into the pathway creating a hazard.


----------



## Inspector Gift (Jun 4, 2020)

I would suggest that you ask your Building Official.


----------



## michael2020 (Jun 4, 2020)

Inspector Gift said:


> I would suggest that you ask your Building Official.


the problem is the ADA also has the similar requirements. even local building official give you an answer, it's possible get denied by DOJ. right?


----------



## michael2020 (Jun 4, 2020)

RLGA said:


> Then, no, the handrail must extend 12 inches in the direction of the handrail. If this were an alteration, the extension would not be required if it projected into the pathway creating a hazard.


I agree with you. But I see so many of the building just have the handrail wrapped around to the side of the guardrail. I wish we have a better way to post a picture to explain this.


----------



## RLGA (Jun 4, 2020)

Wrapping the extension around a corner does nothing for the user of the stairs. The purpose of the extension is to provide the user with something to grasp as they clear the last riser. Nobody should be required to reach out to their side 4 to 12 inches to grasp a handrail when they need support; and, if they do, this extra reaching could cause the user to even further lose their balance.


----------



## Sifu (Jun 5, 2020)

Agree with RLGA.  I admit some of these things seem silly.....until you walk with a mobility impaired person.  When my mother was sick I learned a lot about why some of these rules exist.  Things like a 1/2" level change are easy for me to navigate, but to her they could be a real hidden hazard.  When she would approach a set of steps from the top, the ability to grasp the handrail extension before her first descending step was very important.  Personally I would rather see a reduced extension than a turned extension in an existing building.


----------



## michael2020 (Jun 5, 2020)

Sifu said:


> Agree with RLGA.  I admit some of these things seem silly.....until you walk with a mobility impaired person.  When my mother was sick I learned a lot about why some of these rules exist.  Things like a 1/2" level change are easy for me to navigate, but to her they could be a real hidden hazard.  When she would approach a set of steps from the top, the ability to grasp the handrail extension before her first descending step was very important.  Personally I would rather see a reduced extension than a turned extension in an existing building.


very well explained. Thank you.


----------



## Inspector Gift (Jun 5, 2020)

The wrapped handrail is better than creating an obstruction that could cause an greater hazard.  (The idea of falling at the top of the stairs is not a comfortable thought.) Given that we can not see the actual scenario in question, I do not want to give a definitive answer, but am very confident that the Code Official having jurisdiction can.


----------



## steveray (Jun 5, 2020)

If the landing only allowed you to turn, I would try to allow it, but technically it should be straight out...


----------



## khsmith55 (Jun 5, 2020)

Sifu said:


> Agree with RLGA.  I admit some of these things seem silly.....until you walk with a mobility impaired person.  When my mother was sick I learned a lot about why some of these rules exist.  Things like a 1/2" level change are easy for me to navigate, but to her they could be a real hidden hazard.  When she would approach a set of steps from the top, the ability to grasp the handrail extension before her first descending step was very important.  Personally I would rather see a reduced extension than a turned extension in an existing building.



Totally agree with you and RGLA. On another note, ANSI use to require 12"+ 1 tread on the "downhill" why they changed it to 12" only I don't know. As with you watching my parents age (as I am now) the handrail extensions are a must, the extra 11" +/- was of great benefit going *down* a stair. I still use the 12"+1 tread when I can without too much difficulty.

Ken


----------



## tbz (Jun 9, 2020)

Finally get to go someplace for a weekend and something I know crops up.

1.) The handrail *must* extend in the same direction for the entire extension.  IF there is not enough room the designer didn't do their job correctly.

2.) Second, for ADA & ABA, the extension on the top of stairs, and top and bottom of ramps is measured to the inside, not overall, only the bottom extension is measured to the outer point.  And before the turn down or return starts.

Here are the basics on the Access-Boards website:

https://www.access-board.gov/guidel...uide-to-the-aba-standards/chapter-5-stairways

KH-55, the reason ANSI and ADA/ABA removed the lower stair level extension was at the request of the Visually Impaired community, what was thought to be a benefit was causing much more injuries to those with visual sight issues.


----------



## ADAguy (Jun 9, 2020)

khsmith55 said:


> Totally agree with you and RGLA. On another note, ANSI use to require 12"+ 1 tread on the "downhill" why they changed it to 12" only I don't know. As with you watching my parents age (as I am now) the handrail extensions are a must, the extra 11" +/- was of great benefit going *down* a stair. I still use the 12"+1 tread when I can without too much difficulty.
> 
> Ken



Contrary to ADA, NO?


----------



## michael2020 (Jun 10, 2020)

tbz said:


> Finally get to go someplace for a weekend and something I know crops up.
> 
> 1.) The handrail *must* extend in the same direction for the entire extension.  IF there is not enough room the designer didn't do their job correctly.
> 
> ...


what if the stair is an existing monumental stair in the front of the main entrance? this monumental stair is used also for egress purpose.


----------



## ADAguy (Jun 10, 2020)

add extensions


----------



## RLGA (Jun 10, 2020)

michael2020 said:


> what if the stair is an existing monumental stair in the front of the main entrance? this monumental stair is used also for egress purpose.


Add the extensions if they do not create a hazard (e.g., extending into the required egress width of an adjoining corridor).


----------



## michael2020 (Jun 10, 2020)

thanks Ron. 

Here is the challenge for existing monumental stairs
1. it has columns at the top landing. The current handrail extent to the edge of the column and stops. when we alter the handrails, can I extend the handrail extension around the column?


2. at the bottom of the stair, the stair becomes wider than top to make it more welcome looking. The current handrail follows the curve of the stair edge. Do I extend the handrail following the same curve or go straight?


----------



## classicT (Jun 10, 2020)

michael2020 said:


> thanks Ron.
> 
> Here is the challenge for existing monumental stairs
> 1. it has columns at the top landing. The current handrail extent to the edge of the column and stops. when we alter the handrails, can I extend the handrail extension around the column?
> ...


I believe that the OP was for a new building; however, if this was an existing building I would imagine that at minimum, the scope of work would constitute a Level 2 Alteration (may be a Level 3, an addition, or change of use). For a Level 2 Alteration and upwards, the IEBC provides the following:

*805.9 Handrails*
The requirements of Sections 805.9.1 and 805.9.2 shall apply to handrails from the _work area _floor to, and including, the level of exit discharge.

*805.9.1 Minimum Requirement*
Every required exit stairway that is part of the means of egress for any _work area _and that has three or more risers and is not provided with at least one handrail, or in which the existing handrails are judged to be in danger of collapsing, shall be provided with handrails for the full length of the stairway on at least one side. All exit stairways with a required egress width of more than 66 inches (1676 mm) shall have handrails on both sides.

*805.9.2 Design*
Handrails required in accordance with Section 805.9.1 shall be designed and installed in accordance with the provisions of the _International Building Code_.
​Thus you are right back at IBC 1014.6:

*1014.6 Handrail Extensions*
_Handrails _shall return to a wall, _guard _or the walking surface or shall be continuous to the handrail of an adjacent _flight _of _stairs _or _ramp _run. Where _handrails _are not continuous between _flights_, the _handrails _shall extend horizontally not less than 12 inches (305 mm) beyond the top riser and continue to slope for the depth of one tread beyond the bottom riser. At _ramps _where _handrails _are not continuous between runs, the _handrails _shall extend horizontally above the landing 12 inches (305 mm) minimum beyond the top and bottom of _ramp _runs. The extensions of _handrails _shall be in the same direction of the _flights _of _stairs _at _stairways _and the _ramp _runs at _ramps_.
*Exceptions:*

_Handrails _within a _dwelling unit _that is not required to be _accessible _need extend only from the top riser to the bottom riser.​
_Handrails _serving aisles in rooms or spaces used for assembly purposes are permitted to comply with the handrail extensions in accordance with Section 1029.15.​
_Handrails _for _alternating tread devices _and ships ladders are permitted to terminate at a location vertically above the top and bottom risers. _Handrails _for _alternating tread devices _are not required to be continuous between _flights _or to extend beyond the top or bottom risers.​
As a note to all, take note of the last sentence of 1014.6. "*The extensions of handrails shall be in the same direction of the flights of stairs at stairways and the ramp runs at ramps.*" 

For multiple runs of stairs, one can avoid the extensions altogether by having a continuous handrail per the first sentence of 1014.6.


----------



## RLGA (Jun 10, 2020)

1. The handrail cannot be interrupted, so you can angle it inward slightly and then straighten it out to avoid the column--provided the moving inward of the handrail does not reduce the required egress capacity of the stairway.

2. I would extend the handrail along the tangent of the curve at the last riser. In other words, the direction the handrail is pointing at the location of the last riser should be the direction of the one-tread-depth extension.


----------



## tbz (Jun 11, 2020)

michael2020 said:


> what if the stair is an existing monumental stair in the front of the main entrance? this monumental stair is used also for egress purpose.



Per 2010 ADA section 505.10 Exception 3, they allow for pre existing conditions during alterations of structures built prior to the ACT, but no new structures have an excuse other than not designed correctly.  If there is not enough room, the designer did not allocate space correctly for it!

I included section 505.10 with the exception below for quick reference.

*Below retyped from the 2010 ADA from ADA.GOV website:

505.10 Handrail Extensions.* Handrail gripping surfaces *shall extend beyond and in the same direction of stair flights and ramp runs* in accordance with 505.10.

*EXCEPTIONS: *

*1.* Extensions shall not be required for continuous handrails at the inside turn of switchback or dogleg stairs and ramps.

*2. *In assembly areas, extensions shall not be required for ramp handrails in aisles serving seating where the handrails are discontinuous to provide access to seating and to permit crossovers within aisles.

*3. In alterations, full extensions of handrails shall not be required where such extensions would be hazardous due to plan configuration.

*


----------



## mark handler (Jun 11, 2020)

*2010ADASAD 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 and ramps shall be continuous between flights or runs.

*ANSI 117.1*


----------



## mark handler (Jun 11, 2020)

*One way to achieve both requirements
not the best way, one way*


----------



## michael2020 (Jun 11, 2020)

thanks everyone. I think I know what to do now.


----------



## e hilton (Jun 11, 2020)

“move back” diagram works if you have the space.


----------



## ADAguy (Jun 15, 2020)

"if", as in it depends, doesn't it?


----------



## tbz (Jun 16, 2020)

It all falls back on the design team not providing enough space within the area.

We teach all designers that they should design stair flights with (1) extra tread, being the top tread on the same elevation as the the landing.  This always provides for the handrail extensions and if need be also one on the bottom with the landing if they don't make the landing 12 inches large than the minimum depth.

This figure from the Access-Board Website is a simple quick ref guide.






Quick link tot he full page of the figure


----------

