Stairs Handrail height

[GasmanH]

Sorry if this has been asked (and answered before).

We are in the process of redecorating our Hall Stairs and Landing. This has involved removing the "boxing in" of the original ballisters (its a 1920's house). Looking at the age of the decor I would guess this was done more than 40 years ago. All the original ballisters are still in situ but as compared with next door - though they dont "quite" fit modern regs regarding spacing. Unfortunately we dont like them - and they require significant work to get them presentable after their years hidden away. We therefore plan to replace them.

The question that this raises is what about the hand rail. My understanding is that current building regs require this to to be at least 900 mm. It is closer to 750mm high.

Do I have to move/replace the rail to meet modern standards - or can I legitimately just replace the spindles (obviously ensuring the spacing is less than 100mm). tThe complication that altering the rail height is that it would also involve replacing/extending the newel posts that are too short for the 900mm rail heigh.

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

Whilst you are not obliged to improve them, any changes you make must leave them no worse than before. With regards to the spindles, if you have gaps of 120mm you can retain a 120omm gap but it should be no greater.

 

[big-all]

Whilst you are not obliged to improve them, any changes you make must leave them no worse than before. With regards to the spindles, if you have gaps of 120mm you can retain a 120omm gap but it should be no greater.

whilst i fully agree with every thing you say
bc could be pedantic and say when covered the gap complied as it was less than 100mm[no gap] as it was solid now it is greater than 100mm
having said that there is no requirement to tell them and if its origional thats left they will be non the wiser

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

No even a pedantic BCO who somehow got involved would have to acknowledge the original balusters are spaced at centres that would not comply and it is these (as they are still insitu) that would have to be used as the minimum standard that any new balustrading would need achieve.

Anyhow all hypothetical as you say.

 

[mointainwalker]

Whilst you are not obliged to improve them, any changes you make must leave them no worse than before.

That's interesting Freddy.

Has there ever been any discussion why that is allowed, but with other things such as wall finishes ( not paint obviously) altering more than a certain percentage requires uprating to latest standards ?