John Dirks Jr Posted June 4, 2013 Report Posted June 4, 2013 New construction. Call me a nit picker if you want but I wrote it up. Would you? Local code at the time the permit was pulled was IRC 2003. Riser height should not exceed 7 3/4" Click to Enlarge 36.66 KB Click to Enlarge 26.41 KB Click to Enlarge 32.24 KB
RickSab Posted June 4, 2013 Report Posted June 4, 2013 I would tell my client that I am calling it out, especially if the client is older. Of course there is little that can be done about it. Even if the code at the time is was built was a max of 7 3/4 the AHJ can make an exception. Too late to do anything about it.
Darren Posted June 4, 2013 Report Posted June 4, 2013 I can them out every day. Someone trips and get hurt, guess who's on the hook. Risers, treads and rails; that's where most accidents happen.
Erby Posted June 4, 2013 Report Posted June 4, 2013 Better to tell em about it than get that nasty call. Had one last fall, retired navy guy moving here for a new job. Told him about it A week after moving in, he tripped on the stairs, fell and busted his patella (knee cap). Was out of work for a few months. Felt sorry for him, but ?????
Tom Raymond Posted June 4, 2013 Report Posted June 4, 2013 I tell em, but honestly it's the rise under 6 3/4" that's gonna trip me up. I hate short rise stairs.
Jim Baird Posted June 4, 2013 Report Posted June 4, 2013 I write them up regularly and rant about "leg breaker" stairs. In GA, the state amends, however, to allow a 3/4" diff between risers, instead of the standard 3/8 allowable diff, at the top and the bottom of a flight, I suppose to allow for changes in floor cover thickness at finish floors and at landings.
Chad Fabry Posted June 4, 2013 Report Posted June 4, 2013 My exterior steps have two 7.75" rises and then an 8.125" rise. I trip all the time.
gtblum Posted June 4, 2013 Report Posted June 4, 2013 My exterior steps have two 7.75" rises and then an 8.125" rise. I trip all the time. Probably because you laid them out in metric instead of imperial.
John Kogel Posted June 5, 2013 Report Posted June 5, 2013 JD says "New Construction", then absolutely I would call it. I don't see a reason to allow new construction flaws where builders bend rules to get it done quicker or cheaper.
Jim Baird Posted June 5, 2013 Report Posted June 5, 2013 Chad's risers meet spec. As far a s GA goes, well, bidnis interests trump all, especially depending on the influence (money) level. Why pin a builder/developer down to a specified floor cover prior to reeling in the buyer/fish on the hook? Heck in an adjacent county they are so hungry for someone, anyone, to build anything, that they have waived plans review for all commercial comers.
John Dirks Jr Posted June 6, 2013 Author Report Posted June 6, 2013 Here's another one from today. It's 2003 construction. Click to Enlarge 34.5 KB Click to Enlarge 29.54 KB
John Kogel Posted June 6, 2013 Report Posted June 6, 2013 Wow. Building Officials in your area are not taking their jobs very seriously. No way that could pass here.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now