Stairs question

aliasojo

Our house has a standard straight flight of stairs. I haven't measured so the figures given are all guesswork just for the purpose of this thread.

My stairs are say 800mm wide then there is a gap of approx 70mm before the edge of the top landing which runs the same way as the stairs. When this house was built, it had a ranch style bannister with a middle post for support as well as the obvious top and bottom ones. The top and middle post were in the 70mm gap area and were fixed to the side of the stair. The stair bannister was screwed to one side of the posts and the landing bannister was screwed to the other.

I've taken all the old bannisters and posts out and plan to get a new set of stairs with some sort of spindle/hand rail.

Do I have to leave the original 70mm gap where the posts were or can I have the stairs a bit wider so the side of them would now be touching the edge of the top landing?

I've just re-read that and I suspect it's not clear what I'm on about but I can't think how else to put it.

Doozergirl

I haven't got a clue what you're on about but I guess it's by the by if you want something different! They don't have to be the same - if you have the stairs made to order then you can have whatever width you want

phill99

Can you upload a pic? No idea what you are referring to I'm afraid.

aliasojo

Lol...I thought that. Give me a minute.

aliasojo

Ok..here's the top of the stairs. As you can see, there is a space between the stringer and the edge of the landing. That is where the posts that supported the bannister were, you can still see the nails showing.




The posts were just short lengths of 3" x 2 " timber, screwed to the stringer.

What I want to know, is can I make the stairs wider so there is no gap at all between the stringer and the landing edge?

I hope you get what I mean now otherwise I'm stuffed and I give up. :rotfl:

I think it would be easier to install a new Fusion style bannister if the stairs were right beside the landing edge?

Just found this pic on the net...it's not mine but my old bannister was the same as this....

System

aliasojo wrote: »

Ok..here's the top of the stairs. As you can see, there is a space between the stringer and the edge of the landing. That is where the posts that supported the bannister were, you can still see the nails showing.




The posts were just short lengths of 3" x 2 " timber, screwed to the stringer.

What I want to know, is can I make the stairs wider so there is no gap at all between the stringer and the landing edge?

I hope you get what I mean now otherwise I'm stuffed and I give up. :rotfl:

I think it would be easier to install a new Fusion style bannister if the stairs were right beside the landing edge?

usually that gap is left to make it easier to install the balustrade, if you have another way of doing it then it should be ok to have a stair the full width of the opening...
(just remember that detailling with no room for movement is usually much more difficult and can look a lot worse if it's not quite right, also make sure the opening is the same width at the top and bottom of the upper floor when you are measuring!)

aliasojo

the_r_sole wrote: »

usually that gap is left to make it easier to install the balustrade, if you have another way of doing it then it should be ok to have a stair the full width of the opening...
(just remember that detailling with no room for movement is usually much more difficult and can look a lot worse if it's not quite right, also make sure the opening is the same width at the top and bottom of the upper floor when you are measuring!)

Lol...I don't have any way of doing it...I haven't got a clue when it comes to stairs.

I'm thinking I just want a bannister on the top landing only and maybe just a hand rail down the stair wall, rather than a full set of bannister/spindles from top to bottom. I don't know how these things fix or where/how the newel posts attach, which is why I don't know if I need to leave the gap or if I can get wider stairs.

Becles

We had similar in our house with ranch style bannisters that I had removed, and the gap between the stairs and landing.

A tradesman did ours and he put a wooden facing along the edge of the landing which filled in the gap and I really like it.



This is the gap between the landing and the stairs. Only trouble is, the wood is a magnet for dust and dog hairs to collect as you can see



View from the landing. Please excuse the chew marks on the newell post. Also I didn't realise the chewing culprit was in the picture until I uploaded it :rotfl:

aliasojo

Thanks Becles...what's your top newel post joined on to? Does it go 'into' the gap at all?

We need new stairs anyway so we're not tied in any way...it's just knowing whether to keep the gap or get rid.

The stairs themselves wont need any awkward turning...they'd come straight in the back door and literally lift into place so we dont need to leave manouevering room.

Btw...'culprit' looks like butter wouldn't melt.

jennifernil

You will need some kind of bannister-thing on the outer side of the stairs for safety. If this is to be a bannister that people will hold then you do need some space or fingers will get pinched/trapped where the bannister passes the floor/ceiling.

Also, fixing a handrail to the wall (assuming you don't have one now) will make the stairs narrower for getting furniture up.

aliasojo

jennifernil wrote: »

You will need some kind of bannister-thing on the outer side of the stairs for safety. If this is to be a bannister that people will hold then you do need some space or fingers will get pinched/trapped where the bannister passes the floor/ceiling.

Also, fixing a handrail to the wall (assuming you don't have one now) will make the stairs narrower for getting furniture up.

Do we have to have a bannister by law? (Scotland in case it makes a difference.) We haven't had one for years and I don't think I want one now. (I cut the old stair part of the bannister off yonks ago, it was just the landing bit that was left)

The hall looks much more spacious without it.

Good point about the fingers though.