On Sun, 7 Oct 2012 06:44:56 -0700, "jloomis"
wrote:

Yes, you could find the stairs a problem.
The real problem is the design of the house....
I was dealing with that aspect and since I did not design the house,
I had to go with what existed.
The railings on the upper deck "block" the ocean view when sitting inside.
The owners did not want the view blocked and insisted I build the deck so
that an unobstructed view
be the object.
The only way I could do this is by making the entire deck down, so that the
main deck is under 30" thus no railings needed.
The upper deck I really wanted to cut down on the "promenade stairs" but
would have to put railings up that were 42" height where
no stairs were.
So, the design, the owners wishes, and the code all played a role in this.

Any suggestions are gladly listened to and appreciated if you have any ideas
that would solve the railing issue, the view issue, and the stairs.
john


I can see their point, the old deck rail was rather ugly. Perhaps the
original owner wanted privacy over view.

Any rail that meets code is somewhat an obstruction so lowering it
would made a big difference. I'd still probably put a single
horizontal rail so drunks know when to stop.

Even though code does not require a rail, you can still get sued if
someone falls. There is a case now in CT where a woman tripped on a
brick walk. Insurance company said they would cover all her medical
expenses, but the husband that was not even there is suing for his
"pain and suffering"