Thread: handrails

Look at the picture. You'll see two sets of steps in the concrete walk. They are divided by a landing so they are individual. Each one has three risers.

If one chooses to follow IRC, handrails are not actually required unless there are four or more risers.

Look at the handrails. They are clearly not graspable and do not meet the criteria set forth by IRC. In this case handrails are not required by IRC.

What do you say here? Do you say graspable handrails are needed even though handrails in general are not even required? Or, do you ignore the non graspable aspect since the situation doesn't require them anyway?

My position has always been, if there is a handrail there, it should be correct. If there were not a handrail there, I would have no gripe. Since they are there, I write them up if they are not graspable.

What's your opinion?

Similar Threads:

• handrails
• trampoline stairway handrails
• Handrails on deck
• Multiple Handrails for stairs >4 ft.
• Handrails/risers

Handrails may or may not have been required when the place was built-- did you research when permits were pulled for the installation of that house?

I would just tell them what you just told us and stay away from building code. Tell them that handrails are probably not required, but do make the steps safer. Let them know why they are poorly installed, and let them decide what to do with it.

Originally Posted by John Dirks Jr

My position has always been, if there is a handrail there, it should be correct. If there were not a handrail there, I would have no gripe. Since they are there, I write them up if they are not graspable.

What's your opinion?

Also looks like the handrails extend out beyond the posts and would thus not be considered returned at the ends.

Yes, if something is there, it should be correct. To do otherwise is only leading toward an accident to happen because it was 'not correct'.