Stairway rail on landing - Opinions please

Here is a concept drawing for a potential project - dressing up an existing open construction stair.

I am asking very specifically for your opinions regarding the straight rail on the landing. Do you like that ?
The option is to add a short slope section to follow the stringer and the step down in that corner.

I drew it this way because I like the look. I think it will be stronger (and a bit cheaper to build). I don't think it creates an issue by not leading down the step because the other side of the stair is the principal rail system.

I am not a stair builder as much as a cabinet and furniture guy and so have not a stair builder's instinct. I'm not sure that the newel posts are properly located but the face of 2 landing newels do land on the same step. Seems logical. It is my idea to land the balusters on stringers rather than on the steps. All kinds of well thought out reasons for that which I can get in to if anyone cares.

The drawing is truly a concept and if you study you will note many tricks and illusions. Please don't study :rolleyes:. This is pretty picture for presentation purposes and though mostly accurately proportioned it is not all to scale. I will not be building from it and will make my corrections in the real world - being a better builder than SketchUp draftsman.

So, what do you think about the straight rail? Is that a big faux pas? Thank you all for your consideration.


Attachment 247254 Attachment 247234 Attachment 247236 Attachment 247237

I think the way you have it is the best solution .It looks better than adding a short different slope so close to the lower one,and I think the value of being able to lean on the rail while negotiating the winder is good, too. Making a slope parallel with the lower slope would look good ,but I think, would be confusing in use. As far as leaning on the rail I favor the code minimum height for that reason.

I like that look. It would be nice to see it drawn with the errant post in a more conventional location(intersection of the stringer), just to make a comparison.

Alright, Gents, so I'm not too far out, thank you. Not sure what you are suggesting Chris. Bring the middle post up to the flat with just 2 baluster between and disregard it's position relative to the opposite post? You see, not being a stair "specialist" I did not think of there being an "errant post" but that I might need to add a kink to the rail. Certainly 2 posts on that left side center would be even more "errant" don't you think? Easy enough to draw it for the visual aid if you think that might be useful.

That looks good as it is but the winders are not in code according to the drawing.

Don't get me wrong, I think that the design you have looks fine. The reason I say it's an "errant" post is that it lands part way down the stringer and it doesn't go all the way through the stringer but just kind of sits on the stringer. All the other posts have the stringer or horizontal member terminating into them. Also, I'm not sure if it is important to line the two posts up. Stairways are mostly determined by the rise and run(in my mind, anyway)and yours has a winder which complicates it a bit. To me, all the views look good except maybe the side elevation that shows the "errant" post. I can see why you designed it the way that you did though. It is a good solution to the existing space you have to work within.

I really like the frame and panel risers(if that's what I'm seeing). Nice touch.

Thanks for the feedback. I see the that the mid newel should go to the bottom of the stringer - good catch Chris.

As for the winders Jim - they are what they are. Been signed off by the local building inspector. I'm just putting the dress on the pig.

See if this picture from one of my rentals helps you. This is a rail I dismantled, repaired, refinshed and reinstalled. Had to replace about half the spindles and the lower rail where the spindles are set... lucky my local supplier actually had the spindles. Toughest part was matching the stain. Had to build the newel post at the bottom from scratch as the old one was in splinters.
Attachment 248294

I prefer to position the middle newel post so that the rails meet the post on opposite sides at the same height, if I can. To me, aesthetically, I think it works better. Never had an inspector say one way or the other if it was a concern.

Sam,

Tom's photo demonstrates what I was going to suggest. If you move your middle newel post up one step, it will result in the top rails entering that newel at the same height as illustrated in Tom's photograph.

Based on your all excellent suggestions this is my updated version of the landing/newel posts layout:

Attachment 248306

And in order to correct the winders situation I will propose this modification at my meeting with the clients next week. I like the esthetics of the winders as shown in drawing # 3 above but adding one more step and eliminating the pointy winders is a huge improvement in function and safety. Don't know if they will buy it. As you can see, the drawing only shows the altered treads "mocked up" and many essential details missing. I'm a much better woodworker than I am a draftsman so in the real world all we be set to right :rolleyes:.

Attachment 248309 Thanks for all your input.

I would make the landing flat and get rid of the angled steps. People coming down stairs tend to stay to the open side, particularly since the hand rail is there, and will slip as they try to step on the narrow places on those three angled steps. Go with a flat landing, turn 90 degrees with a platform and then go down the rest of the steps. It will be much safer. This is very important if you have older people or very young people living in the house.

I agree Lee but the stairway is existing. it is a construction stair now with 2x stringers and plywood treads with no risers. I am just finishing out.
In order to eliminate the angled step altogether I would need to add two steps into the room and I know that won't fly with the owners.
I'm hoping they will consider my lesser option. Don't know why the builders chose to build as I drew in the first set of sketches but that's what it is.
I have to assume that the owners have already had this discussion so I will tread lightly on my alternative proposal :).

Sam,
As a stair guy I agree with the suggestions above, but as a builder I'm quite impressed with your hesitance to make a major new suggestion to the clients. I wish more of my subs would learn to do that, do you teach lessons?

If I was the builder I wouldn't mind you making the suggestion to me though. Things like suggestions on improvement (to me) and making it a point to stand with the decisions made before you got there are a great way to solidify the business relationship and make for great future projects.

Thanks for the pat on the back Hank. Nice of you to say. I guess having worn lots of hats myself and so I've learned not to make a scene of showing clients how smart I am as compared to all the other guys. I have worked with builders and subs too who are all about making their job easier without regard to the big effort and sadly with no concern for what the client needs. Glad to have most of that behind me. These days I am mostly the last guy on the job. Meeting on this one Friday. Wish me luck.

Good luck Sam. Hope it goes well and that your competence show in what you say and that your genius show in what you don't. I just scored a beautiful winding foyer set that we will do in a couple weeks. I'll try and remember to post pics here when I'm done. They're giving us carte Blanche to do it as we see fit (which is awesome except for the fact that they got me on a fixed price for the whole house trim package so I shouldn't dream too big)