Rate My Stair install...

[mpire]

I got some good feedback from everyone here at GJ and yesterday one of the stairs just collapsed a few inches, so I just couldn't procrastinate any longer on replacing the stairs.

Its roughly 36 inches wide, concrete block on both sides, and 14 steps up.



I used some leftover plastic brick mold trim on the bottom of the stringers so they wouldn't be directly touching the concrete on the bottom.



There are 3 stringers and these are all sitting on two 2x6s that I have attached to the block using joist hangers. It just makes it so much easier to set the stringers in place this way.



I'm not 100% sure if I have enough lag screws in it. In addition to the 2x6 on joist hangers, I have a 1/4" concrete screw every other step on the outsides. So 7 per side, 14 total. Would you have used more?



Anyway, the quantity of screws is really the main reason for the post, but I thought I would share some pix of what I did today and get some feedback.




Thanks again!



Next step, painting. I don't care much for painting.

 

[Sumboodie]

No toe kick?

 

[Bert_]

I might have spaced the outside stringers in 1 1/2" or so just to help things dry. I doubt many would that though

 

[billconner]

It looks very nice. I'm sure you have enough screws.

The top tread looks just a little long compared to rest. So easy to do. I did it on my new porch steps last fall. Luckily 7 treads and I could pull the whole unit and adjust. Could you anchor a 1 by or 2 by to landing to have uniform tread depths?

I used similar detail at bottom - using PVC 1 x 2s to lift stringers off concrete. Just did same on new garage door openings.

 

[rayra]

Looks like good work and many would have cheaped out on the middle stringer. Doubling the concrete screws might help control the wood better as it ages and tries to contort. But I don't think that's critical.

 

[Firebrick43]

Second on no toe kick. They really need them to be as safe as they can be.

 

[kaymccampbell]

Looks dandy. You can always put more screws in it, but it should last a good long time as is.

 

[mpire]

The top tread looks just a little long compared to rest.

I don't understand what you mean. Each tread is 36" of a 2x12.

 

[mpire]

They really need them to be as safe as they can be.

Why do I need a toe kick?

They were concrete steps before just like this.

 

[billconner]

I don't understand what you mean. Each tread is 36" of a 2x12.

It just looked from photo perspective top tread was deeper, of maybe ft it's riser was less? Just based on perspective.

Codes generally require that a 4" sphere can't pass through the riser. I think that's what folks mean by toe kick. Based on the size of the head of a kid that can crawl. So with a 2x12, if your risers are 5 1/2 or greater, code require some infill. Don't know your CV ode situation, but that's one that is enforced in my very rural area.

 

[Firebrick43]

Why do I need a toe kick?

They were concrete steps before just like this.

Because it’s code. Codes change. You have to bring it up to code when you rebuild things.

It not only keeps things like little kids from crawling thru but if you slip it keeps you from putting a foot thru and getting a terrible compound fracture that makes rescue difficult.

It’s IBC 1015.4

“Required guards shall not have openings that allow passage of a sphere 4 inches (102 mm) in diameter from the walking surface to the required guard height.”

You also need to add a handrail to the other side as well to comply with code.

It hard to tell but the existing handrail looks to be to close to the wall and not “graspable” as required by code.

 

[billconner]

If this is your house, a one or two family dwelling, good chance it's the IRC that applies and I don't think it requires a handrail on both sides. And it allows that type of handrail (Type B iirc). You might be able to make the case that the handrail was existing.

Your previous concrete steps were only 1 1/2" thick? And had same open risers?

Sorry to pick on these details. Your workmanship was quite good.

 

[The Cobbler]

FWIW, Riser is the correct term for stairs, not toe kick

 

[The Cobbler]

nice job on the stairs

 

[Firebrick43]

If this is your house, a one or two family dwelling, good chance it's the IRC that applies and I don't think it requires a handrail on both sides. And it allows that type of handrail (Type B iirc). You might be able to make the case that the handrail was existing.

Your previous concrete steps were only 1 1/2" thick? And had same open risers?

Sorry to pick on these details. Your workmanship was quite good.

IBC 1011.11 says both sides. An outside stairway that’s has more than three risers is not exempt. Interior would be exempt but not exterior.

And the existing hand rail shape is fine, the problem is it’s not graspable as it appears to close to the wall.

1014.6 states it has to be a minimum of 1 1/2” away from the wall

 

[PCustoms]

I'd be nervous holding all that up with blue tapcons. Seems like all I do with those is snap them.

Should/could you get some real anchors in there?

Another option would be some vertical supports under the stringer or at least at your 2x6.

 

[billconner]

IBC 1011.11 says both sides. An outside stairway that’s has more than three risers is not exempt. Interior would be exempt but not exterior.

And the existing hand rail shape is fine, the problem is it’s not graspable as it appears to close to the wall.

1014.6 states it has to be a minimum of 1 1/2” away from the wall

I thought this was his house, usually subject to IRC, not IBC.

"R311.7.8Handrails.​

Handrails shall be provided on not less than one side of each flight of stairs with four or more risers."

The 1 1/2" clearance is same. If it's the same existing handrail, it might not have to be replaced.

 

[glennm]

Great job! I would add a toe kick for three reasons, safety, looks more finished and it will keep **** from blowing in there.

 

[Chris705]

MPIRE - stairs look great!

 

[NUTTSGT]

They look nice and you did a good job.

The only concern I would have is where the top of the stringers land, in mid-air. Whether it's code or not, I don't know but I would have something there for them to land on and attach.

 

[jack stand]

Great job all around.
"Codes" are 20+ years past being basic structural safety and are now deep into "nanny" territory. 1 handrail, no toe kick, fasteners ate fine with the very simple shear loading.
Good job.

 

[Firebrick43]

I thought this was his house, usually subject to IRC, not IBC.

"R311.7.8Handrails.​

Handrails shall be provided on not less than one side of each flight of stairs with four or more risers."

The 1 1/2" clearance is same. If it's the same existing handrail, it might not have to be replaced.

Picture 5 shows 4 meter bases. Its not a single family house or even a duplex.

Clearly falls under IBC.

Great job all around.
"Codes" are 20+ years past being basic structural safety and are now deep into "nanny" territory. 1 handrail, no toe kick, fasteners ate fine with the very simple shear loading.
Good job.

Stairs are second in injuries only to motor vehicle accidents. The safety of stairs is really well researched and well known, and codes written to help make them as safe as can be. Being sued for negligence is not fun from those that I have talked to? It not as if it would cost much money either to fix the issues.

 

[jimkinney]

I also have concerns with the Tapcon's. Not sure where you are in FL, but I'm near the coast and those would rust out in a year or two.

 

[billconner]

codes written to help make them as safe as can be

I have to disagree, especially with IRC. the 7 3/4 x 10 stairs being high on my list. Even the 7 x 11 IBC stairs are not "as safe as can be". You could reduce a lot of injuries going to a 6 x 13, with a lot of research pointing to this. I could continue with handrails and guards but as long as the homebuilders have a strangle hold on the code development, it's not going to get much better.

CPSC research shows cost of stair injuries is over $100 billion per year. Stairs are indeed the most hazardous "product" in our lives. And as shown, most just accept it.

 

[Firebrick43]

I have to disagree, especially with IRC. the 7 3/4 x 10 stairs being high on my list. Even the 7 x 11 IBC stairs are not "as safe as can be". You could reduce a lot of injuries going to a 6 x 13, with a lot of research pointing to this. I could continue with handrails and guards but as long as the homebuilders have a strangle hold on the code development, it's not going to get much better.

CPSC research shows cost of stair injuries is over $100 billion per year. Stairs are indeed the most hazardous "product" in our lives. And as shown, most just accept it.

Ok maybe safe as can be is not the perfect quote. Maybe a “Certain minimum level of safety” would be a better phrase.

Although I find stairs with shallow six inch risers and deeper than 11” treads unnatural to myself and have seen over the years many trip on them as my grandfather installed such design at his house and my father still lives there. It doesn’t match up to a healthy persons natural gate.

Is better for people using canes or walkers or of limited strength however.

 

[billconner]

Ok maybe safe as can be is not the perfect quote. Maybe a “Certain minimum level of safety” would be a better phrase.

Although I find stairs with shallow six inch risers and deeper than 11” treads unnatural to myself and have seen over the years many trip on them as my grandfather installed such design at his house and my father still lives there. It doesn’t match up to a healthy persons natural gate.

Is better for people using canes or walkers or of limited strength however.

Not what I've seen in a lot of research with a broad range of individuals. Just the 11" run forces many people to turn their foot inward or outward to fit and that reduces stability.

Population is also getting older, which impacts this.

Non-uniformity, poor visibility, and poor handrails are the bigger causes of stair injuries. Amazing how many builders can't get top rise - from floor to first tread - equal to the rest of the risers. Major cause.

 

[dfiler2]

Your stairs look great and i don't think risers are required by any code I've seen, in fact open stairs in homes and commercial building are more common all the time.

Google Search

 

[nh_yota]

I'd add some real concrete anchors with bolts and/or vertical supports to the stringers. Those tapcons will eventually rust out and the whole thing will come crashing down since the tops of the strings don't rest on anything.

 

[Sumboodie]

FWIW, Riser is the correct term for stairs, not toe kick

That makes sense, was thinking of cabinets I guess.

I was mostly think.it will help keep junk from falling under the stairs, as well as snow.

Also I know a guy that screwed up his leg slipping on ice while going up stairs. His food shot between the steps.

Also adds some strength to the stairs.

 

[Innovate1]

Riser is required now for residential (single family)? I see that the OP is not single family but mine is. Built 20 years ago and doesn't have risers. Would like to add them but the overhang of the treads is minimal. So I would need to use thin material backed up with some blocking. Had thought about routing grooves for the stringers but it would be so thin it would be hard to work with and maybe break in handling. Or cut back the stringers which would be a pain without taking off the treads. Maybe take off the treads and cut them down would be the easiest. Any suggestions?

 

[Renegade1LI]

Looks great, third stringer really stiffens it up.

 

[mike93lx]

That makes sense, was thinking of cabinets I guess.

I was mostly think.it will help keep junk from falling under the stairs, as well as snow.

Also I know a guy that screwed up his leg slipping on ice while going up stairs. His food shot between the steps.

Also adds some strength to the stairs.

If those stairs have ice on them, everyone north of the Mason Dixon line is already dead.

Op, looks good. I'd redo the handrail to get more space to the wall

 

[Firebrick43]

Your stairs look great and i don't think risers are required by any code I've seen, in fact open stairs in homes and commercial building are more common all the time.

Google Search

If you look, most of those designs have extra thick treads, tempered glass, or thin wires/rods to conform to the 4" sphere rule.

Ignorance of the code holds no weight, and the code numbers have been cited.

 

[dfiler2]

I don't see any glass or wire in the place of a stair riser in any of those pics and the treads are thick because they are only using 2 stringers. As far as the code I also don't see any code cited that has to do with the riser, maybe I'm missing it.

 

[billconner]

Your stairs look great and i don't think risers are required by any code I've seen, in fact open stairs in homes and commercial building are more common all the time.

Google Search

I picked one photo, suspecting many of these are not in US, and the article accompanying it was about the problem of these not meeting code. https://www.apartmenttherapy.com/floating-staircase-dangers-37180476

 

[billconner]

Your stairs look great and i don't think risers are required by any code I've seen, in fact open stairs in homes and commercial building are more common all the time.

Google Search

Here is text from 2018 IRC:

R311.7.5.1 Risers.

The riser height shall be not more than 73/4 inches (196 mm). The riser height shall be measured vertically between leading edges of the adjacent treads. The greatest riser height within any flight of stairs shall not exceed the smallest by more than 3/8 inch (9.5 mm). Risers shall be vertical or sloped from the underside of the nosing of the tread above at an angle not more than 30 degrees (0.51 rad) from the vertical. At open risers, openings located more than 30 inches (762 mm), as measured vertically, to the floor or grade below shall not permit the passage of a 4-inch-diameter (102 mm) sphere.
Exceptions:

1. 1.The opening between adjacent treads is not limited on spiral stairways.
2. 2.The riser height of spiral stairways shall be in accordance with Section R311.7.10.1.

 

[billconner]

And text from 2018 IBC:

1011.5.5.3Solid risers.
CDP​

Risers shall be solid.
Exceptions:

1. 1.Solid risers are not required for stairways that are not required to comply with Section 1009.3, provided that the opening between treads does not permit the passage of a sphere with a diameter of 4 inches (102 mm).
2. 2.Solid risers are not required for occupancies in Group I-3 or in Group F, H and S occupancies other than areas accessible to the public. The size of the opening in the riser is not restricted.
3. 3.Solid risers are not required for spiral stairways constructed in accordance with Section 1011.10.

With a few very special exceptions, risers have to prevent a 4" sphere from passing through in most buildings in USA. I don't know exactly when this first was in codes but probably applies to buildings designed and constructed in at least last two decades.

 

[billconner]

IBC 1011.11 says both sides. An outside stairway that’s has more than three risers is not exempt. Interior would be exempt but not exterior.

And the existing hand rail shape is fine, the problem is it’s not graspable as it appears to close to the wall.

1014.6 states it has to be a minimum of 1 1/2” away from the wall

Yes, if commercial - IBC - handrails on both sides. Has mpire said this is not a one or two family dwelling?

 

[Firebrick43]

I don't see any glass or wire in the place of a stair riser in any of those pics and the treads are thick because they are only using 2 stringers. As far as the code I also don't see any code cited that has to do with the riser, maybe I'm missing it.

Post 11 has the IBC code number.

Google Image Result for https://static.wixstatic.com/media/f6f9dc_682dc0cb3f444bfaba6bed5bd63eedc4~mv2.jpg/v1/fill/w_640,h_378,al_c,q_80,usm_0.66_1.00_0.01,enc_auto/f6f9dc_682dc0cb3f444bfaba6bed5bd63eedc4~mv2.jpg

Glass riser

From an open stairway manufacture

Open Staircase Styles | Designed Stairs

Open rise stairs have open space between the steps. Click here to view the different open staircase styles we offer, then contact us to learn more or get a quote!

designedstairs.com

“ Spacers or partial risers are typically needed for treads 3" and smaller to meet the 4" sphere code, as required by most building codes. Spacers can be attached permanently or made to be removable.”

Many thick treads are absolutely done to meet codes. 1-1/2 inch thick treads fine strength wise with two stringers on standard width stairs.

Yes, if commercial - IBC - handrails on both sides. Has mpire said this is not a one or two family dwelling?

Again, 5th photo of post 1 has 4 meter bases, it an apartment building or condos. Hence IBC applies.

 

[Bert_]

Lot of people bent out of shape over a riser...

OP, if it makes you feel better I built basement stairs in my house with an 9 1/4" tread, 8" rise and no riser.