Replies

1. 
   Mike_Maines_ | Sep 06, 2001 11:46pm | #1

   *
   Al, go in to your inspector's office, bring a drawing of what you want to do, and ask if they'll let it slide. If they say yes, try to get the same inspector to do the final inspection on your house. If they say no, you're s.o.l. You don't want someone's kid to get their head stuck in there anyway.

   Maybe change your baluster style?

1. 
   piffin_ | Sep 07, 2001 12:24am | #2

   *This involves more than just the building dept. We don't have an enforced building code in my neck of the woods, but the insurance companies speak loudly on this. It would be a shame to built it with the blesings of the code inspector and then find that you can't buy homeowners insurance.

1. 
   Stan_Foster | Sep 07, 2001 01:58am | #3

   *Al: If your balusters have 5/8 inch tops like most, that means that you have 4 5/16 inch spacing between the pins. The only way it would fly here, is to put three balusters per tread. Also, we cannot have a run less than 10 inches which would further spread the gap.

1. 
   Bucksnort_Billy | Sep 07, 2001 02:28am | #4

   *A1, 'round NC, the only spacing measurement the inspector checks is at the bottom of the baluster, over 4" there and you're fixing something...I've never had to do a tread with 3 balusters...Steppin' out, BB

1. 
   Jim_Walters | Sep 08, 2001 03:34pm | #5

   *A1, 'round NC, the only spacing measurement the inspector checks is at the bottom of the baluster, over 4" there and you're fixing something...I've never had to do a tread with 3 balusters... Me neither...two per tread. I think it would look goofy with any more than that.

2. 
   Stan_Foster | Sep 08, 2001 11:30pm | #6

   *This one has three per tread. If it had two, I would have had to tear it all out.

3. 
   George_Roberts | Sep 09, 2001 02:14am | #7

   *Al ---You have a code. Comply.Stan ---Nice detail.

4. 
   Stan_Foster | Sep 09, 2001 03:32am | #8

   *George: ThanksI have to admit that I didnt like going to three per tread myself. However, on the simpler styles, it looks ok. Heres some pictures of what I call pool que balusters. This was the first stairs I had to use three per tread. I still use two per tread occasionally when the stairway is under less strict code requirements and the client also insists.

5. 
   Stan_Foster | Sep 09, 2001 03:33am | #9

   *closer view

6. 
   Stan_Foster | Sep 09, 2001 04:01am | #10

   *One more note on the four inch rule. In Champaign Il, and many other larger cities in my area, they come out to the site with a four inch diameter ball. If that ball can find its way through any part of the balustrade, it will not pass. It will only be a matter of time where this is mandatory everywhere.

7. 
   Bucksnort_Billy | Sep 09, 2001 04:28am | #11

   *Hey Stan, howcome you'd have to tear it out? Those treads don't look that wide...well, at least not from here...

8. 
   Stan_Foster | Sep 09, 2001 05:12am | #12

   *Bucksnort: If you have a tread with say a ten inch run, two balusters per tread are 5.0 inches on center. With say 3/4 inch taper tops, that puts the gap there at 4.25 inches. I have no problem with that at all personally, but the inspectors do. A 4 inch ball will go through that spacing. If you used those same balusters and used them on a tread with a 9.50 inch run, then the center to center distance is 4.75 inches. This leaves exactly 4.0 inches between them. However, now the run is under the 10 inch minimum. I will still use two per tread if it is in a more relaxed code area and the customer insists.

9. 
   Al_Fielder | Sep 10, 2001 12:41pm | #13

   *Up here in Rockford , Il (actually Belvidere), the code is that the tread width is 10" min but the run is not specified. It's kind of weird, I know. The inspectors here have the 4" ball and I've talked to one contractor who had to rip out his handrail because it exceeded the 4" rule by .25" (all the way down to the tread). I have decided to be safe rather than sorry so I went with 3 per tread. It looks OK so far (I ran out of balusters so I am waiting for the next delivery).Thanks everyone for the input.

10. 
    Qtrmeg_ | Sep 11, 2001 12:47am | #14

    *Stan, how did you decide on the newel placement for this one? Btw, those are the same balusters I have in my house, I called them "easy to finish", ;-).Btw, btw, nice work, but you must be tired of hearing that by now.

11. 
    Joseph_Fusco | Sep 11, 2001 12:50am | #15

    *AL,

    You should have asked the "inspector" now that you've complied with the first ridiculous rule, what happens when the same small child who's head is 4" is tumbling down those same stairs because the "handrail" you used is to wide for him/her to grab?Or, when that same child is tumbling down those stairs because the "handrail" is to "high" for him/her to reach in the first place.I'm sure his answer will be that the reason for the 4" rule is so when that same child is PLAYING on those stairs(???) that he/she can't stick his/her head through and get stuck???????? Or, when that child is falling down those stairs (because they where playing or couldn't reach the handrail or the handrail was to wide for them to grab) his/her head can't get stuck on the way down.Yep, you just got to love this stuff. . . . . . . .

    View Image "The first step towards vice is to shroud innocent actions in mystery, and whoever likes to conceal something sooner or later has reason to conceal it." Aristotle

12. 
    Qtrmeg_ | Sep 11, 2001 01:34am | #16

    *Stan, how did you decide on the newel placement for this one? Btw, those are the same balusters I have in my house, I called them "easy to finish", ;-).Btw, btw, nice work, but you must be tired of hearing that by now.

13. 
    Stan_Foster | Sep 11, 2001 02:14am | #17

    *Qtrmeg: Thanks for the compliment. The newel placement on the pool que baluster stairs was a sticky point between myself and the architect. She kept insisting that the newel be in the middle of the tread, instead of where it should have been, on the front riser. As you can see in the picture, she won out. I usually figure the centerline of the newel at the riser face. A 3.5 inch newel would then have .5 inch reveal on the nosing.

14. 
    Qtrmeg_ | Sep 11, 2001 02:50am | #18

    *Stan, how did you decide on the newel placement for this one? Btw, those are the same balusters I have in my house, I called them "easy to finish", ;-).Btw, btw, nice work, but you must be tired of hearing that by now.

15. 
    Qtrmeg_ | Sep 11, 2001 02:56am | #19

    *It was a different look Stan, I'm sure she knew what she was doing, a vision thing. You managed to balance the whole thing well, it works.

16. 
    Stan_Foster | Sep 11, 2001 03:00am | #20

    *Qtrmeg: I was considering how much harder it was to install those newels through the middle of the tread. That was time consuming. It does look different.

17. 
    Bucksnort_Billy | Sep 11, 2001 11:13pm | #21

    *Stan, Like, I said, we have the 4" sphere rule, but it only seems to apply to the bottom of the pickets. I've never seen an inspector with an actual ball to measure them.NC is going to the International Code, so we may, indeed, have to start spacing from the narrowest point. Sure looks cluttered, to me, with three balusters, but I'm not fighting with inspectors, their job is to enforce the codes, not make 'em. Besides, the majority of our inspectors here are exceptionally helpful, if you don't piss them off...

18. 
    Stan_Foster | Sep 11, 2001 11:56pm | #22

    *Bucksnort: I agree on the cluttered look unless they are simple and smaller like those pool que ones I posted. What surprises me is that there is nothing said about having stairs with finishes on them so slick that a fly can't land without skidding. After I busted a tailbone one time from super slick steps, I have thought that they would soon require a carpet runner on steps. I believe slick steps causes more falls that runs being a little short. I had a neighbor whose husband polished his steps so slick his wife almost broke her hip.

19. 
    piffin_ | Sep 14, 2001 01:47am | #23

    *Sometimes three can look OK.I worked up the overall design here and had a shipbuilder craftsman do the work. They are used to a lot of curves. The ballusters are custom turned and fluted to match the previous ones from 1896 which show on the run going upstairs.6-3/8" rise over 10-1/4" run if I remember right.

20. 
    piffin_ | Sep 14, 2001 01:49am | #24

    *OOPs! here it be -

21. 
    Bucksnort_Billy | Sep 22, 2001 01:26am | #25

    *Piffin, that does look nice, and Stan, I finished my own stairs in poly. Almost put myself through the window at the landing. Old and slower, and a bunch more careful...

2. 
   Al_Fielder | Sep 22, 2001 01:26am | #26

   *
   I'm building a house and am at the trimming out stage. The stairs have a traditional "over the top" railing system and I would really like to stay with two balusters per tread. The run is 9-7/8" which makes the O.C. spacing 4-15/16". The balusters are 1-1/4" base traditional spindles that taper off toward the top. My rail height is 34".
   Bottom Line: Within the top ~6" this scheme exceeds the 4" max opening requirement.
   Any ideas/suggestions?