Woodworking Talk banner
1 - 6 of 6 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
476 Posts
I've checked it again but I can't come up with anything that would be code compliant....
Not saying a new set couldn't be built there (8"riser, 9-3/4"treads) but I can't recommend anything (wink *) that will properly fit within the constraints of your space.

Also.... When laying out your stringer cuts : include your finished flooring thickness in your total rise.
You'll do a reduction of the tread thickness to the heel of the stringer, but from that thickness subtract the thickness of the finish flooring :
IE: 1-1/8" thick tread
(-1/4"finish floor)
=. 7/8" drop cut /reduction from heel.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
476 Posts
What did you think of my suggestion of notching the stringers back into the second floor to gain more run?
If it was on site, that would be the route I would take to achieve compliance. We'd remove and reframe a portion of the floor to get the stairwell opening to the dimensions we'd need to get headroom clearance and a comfortable run.
As it is right now there's sufficient height to achieve a comfortable riser height between 7 and 8"...with 8" bordering on the unnecessary.
That being said... I don't know the site conditions; meaning an enlarged stairwell could take away space from the floor above in a negative way.
I don't remember reading where this stairwell was.... I should probably go back and read it again.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
476 Posts
for new construction, yes. but there is no law that requires old construction to be updated to the new code. or i'd be screwed
I'd have to look in my code book (even though mine would be irrevelant to your area), but I think we are only permitted to repair to the original state, but replacements must be built to current code.
If it's not a code requirement, it is definitely a municipal requirement (in my area).

I'm hoping the op updates some time soon.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
476 Posts
please do. unless you know it as fact, don't tell the guy he needs to build it to current code. i realize your in canada, but down here taking of property is illegal. no old house is to current code in either country. codes change every couple of years, updating houses to the newest code would be cost prohibitive, you'd never be able to get a mortgage on any building. houses built up to the 70s have 2 wire plugs, narrow doors, steep stairs, balusters too wide; it's all legal. my house is ballooned framed, very dangerous in a fire. but it's legal.
new cars are built every year. adding air bags and crumple zones classic vehicles would cause a riot anywhere. nope we won't license your 2015 cuz it doesn't have rear camera?
Allow me to paraphrase my previous post for clarity:
In my area, replacements must be built to code as a matter of professional integrity.. I've not yet been able to locate a specific code requirement to satisfy your request.
Simply put, I offered up nothing to the original conversation, and also never implicitly stated that the op was required to rebuild his stairs to code.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
476 Posts
Ogre, I've referred to code as it applies to building a compliant set of stairs.
I've not once stated to the op that they are required to adhere to that.
Not once.
In regards to professional integrity... All that means is that if I'm invited in to a prospective customer's home to assess a scope of work, I'm going to look at it from a compliance perspective first, then offer up my proposal.
If there is a difference in what they expect me to do, and what I propose to.... Then we can simply end the relationship there.
I'm not in any position to force a homeowner to alter their home.
That's it, that's all it comes down to.
I would like to see stairs built to fall within all the prescriptive requirements, but I also know that not every job will allow for that.
I am still looking for a code reference to satisfy your request.
 
1 - 6 of 6 Posts
Top