I know every place and situation is different, just trying to figure if
this is reasonable. (And someone's not pulling something over on a naive
home owner).

New to me house has a "sun room" built across the back of the house.
There are two separate sets of cement steps from the house to the room.
The steps are very awkward for me. I'm 5' tall, and the distance from
the door to the first step is like 9-1/2", and different on the other.
And since I have to step over a threshold just inside the door, it makes
the first step *really* big for me. I'm interested in having new "user
friendly" steps put in over the existing ones.

I had a contractor that I've used before look at them, just to build
plain wood steps over the existing steps, using Trex. He originally
quoted me $450 for the two, or $420 if I did it with plain wood. Then
the other day he came by and looked at them again and sent me an email
that he'd realized he couldn't do them as he'd originally planned with
stringers and needed to use a "box method" and that "there is more
material required with this method so the new price would be $750.00."

So questions - shouldn't he have realized what type of design he'd need
when he first measured the steps and quoted on it? And should the
difference really be $300 for additional material? And most importantly,
what would a reasonable price (range) be for two sets of steps (3 steps
each) in the Baltimore area? I was happy with the $450 although a male
relative told me he thought it was too much since it would "only need
$50 worth of material". I wouldn't be asking here about the original
price, but I'm confused by the $300 increase. (It's not the cost of
Trex, because the orig price specified a $30 reduction if he used
unfinished lumber).

Current steps -
http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/v7...kwardsteps.jpg

"Lee" wrote in message


So questions - shouldn't he have realized what type of design he'd need
when he first measured the steps and quoted on it?

Maybe, but did you ever make a mistake or not plan something perfectly?
This is where the old saying "**** happens" comes from.


And should the difference really be $300 for additional material?

Material and labor.

And most importantly,
what would a reasonable price (range) be for two sets of steps (3 steps
each) in the Baltimore area? I was happy with the $450 although a male
relative told me he thought it was too much since it would "only need $50
worth of material".


Give the male relative $50 for material and buy him a six-pack. Your guy
may not want the job and he is telling you that softly.

"Lee" wrote in message
. ..

So questions - shouldn't he have realized what type of design he'd need
when he first measured the steps and quoted on it? And should the
difference really be $300 for additional material? And most importantly,
what would a reasonable price (range) be for two sets of steps (3 steps
each) in the Baltimore area? I was happy with the $450 although a male
relative told me he thought it was too much since it would "only need $50
worth of material". I wouldn't be asking here about the original price,
but I'm confused by the $300 increase. (It's not the cost of Trex, because
the orig price specified a $30 reduction if he used unfinished lumber).

Current steps -
http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/v7...kwardsteps.jpg

Frankly I am a little surprised that the initial quote was so high. Please
realize that it all depends on your locality but that does not look like a
$450 job to me. For a licensed insured contractor is some areas it might be
a fair price. For sure I would not pay the $750.

I suggest you get a few more quotes from someone who needs the work. Even
in the high cost NE there has to be some one who wants to work.


Colbyt

"Lee" wrote

I know every place and situation is different, just trying to figure if
this is reasonable. (And someone's not pulling something over on a naive
home owner).

Hi Lee!

New to me house has a "sun room" built across the back of the house. There
are two separate sets of cement steps from the house to the room. The
steps are very awkward for me. I'm 5' tall, and the distance from the door
to the first step is like 9-1/2", and different on the other. And since I
have to step over a threshold just inside the door, it makes the first
step *really* big for me. I'm interested in having new "user friendly"
steps put in over the existing ones.

No doubt. I looked at the picture. In my area, thats a code violation.
The problem is they didnt make them far enough out to add that missing top
step (probably wanted to preserve room-space) and created a true safety
issue. Possibly they were the origional ones from the back door of the
house to the yard?

First in dreaming of this, I would literally have the cement taken out then
make proper wood steps with a rail. 3 steps for us short folks (I'm a whole
inch taller than you so neener neener!). Maybe nice black filligree wrought
iron ones?

Measure your foot. Have the steps about 1.5 to 2 inches longer than your
foot. You wont lose much room space and it will work. If you accomodate
for bigger feet, you'll need about a 3 ft out stretch.

I had a contractor that I've used before look at them, just to build plain
wood steps over the existing steps, using Trex. He originally quoted me
$450 for the two, or $420 if I did it with plain wood. Then the other day
he came by and looked at them again and sent me an email that he'd
realized he couldn't do them as he'd originally planned with stringers and
needed to use a "box method" and that "there is more material required
with this method so the new price would be $750.00."

It's not just the material, it's the labor. My guess is he wanted to build
up both steps to make it a more even shift. Essentially the new design
would be one that pretty much ignores the cement totally and makes a new
structure over it.

What might be more functional and look better from the little I can see of
the room, is to have a brick mason put a layer on each step, raising them
both, then some fax thinner brick on the sides and perhaps the riser between
the steps if you wont loose too much depth. If you just raise the top step
without the bottom one, you just shift the problem to a different level.

So questions - shouldn't he have realized what type of design he'd need
when he first measured the steps and quoted on it? And should the

In honesty, the fellow called back to show it wouldnt work and he'd need to
do more. You can get a second opinion (and should) but this is one of thse
pesky 'small projects' that can cost a fair amount.

difference really be $300 for additional material? And most importantly,

Labor, not material I bet.


Current steps -
http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/v7...kwardsteps.jpg

"Lee" wrote in message
. ..

I know every place and situation is different, just trying to figure if
this is reasonable. (And someone's not pulling something over on a naive
home owner).

New to me house has a "sun room" built across the back of the house. There
are two separate sets of cement steps from the house to the room. The
steps are very awkward for me. I'm 5' tall, and the distance from the door
to the first step is like 9-1/2", and different on the other. And since I
have to step over a threshold just inside the door, it makes the first
step *really* big for me. I'm interested in having new "user friendly"
steps put in over the existing ones.

I had a contractor that I've used before look at them, just to build plain
wood steps over the existing steps, using Trex. He originally quoted me
$450 for the two, or $420 if I did it with plain wood. Then the other day
he came by and looked at them again and sent me an email that he'd
realized he couldn't do them as he'd originally planned with stringers and
needed to use a "box method" and that "there is more material required
with this method so the new price would be $750.00."

So questions - shouldn't he have realized what type of design he'd need
when he first measured the steps and quoted on it? And should the
difference really be $300 for additional material? And most importantly,
what would a reasonable price (range) be for two sets of steps (3 steps
each) in the Baltimore area? I was happy with the $450 although a male
relative told me he thought it was too much since it would "only need $50
worth of material". I wouldn't be asking here about the original price,
but I'm confused by the $300 increase. (It's not the cost of Trex, because
the orig price specified a $30 reduction if he used unfinished lumber).

Current steps -
http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/v7...kwardsteps.jpg


It looks to me as though those steps were there before the sunroom. That
may have been an outside doorway at one time. It would be best to get
several quotes and opinions as to what can be done.

On Sep 13, 2:49*pm, Lee wrote:
I know every place and situation is different, just trying to figure if
this is reasonable. (And someone's not pulling something over on a naive
home owner).

New to me house has a "sun room" built across the back of the house.
There are two separate sets of cement steps from the house to the room.
The steps are very awkward for me. I'm 5' tall, and the distance from
the door to the first step is like 9-1/2", and different on the other.
And since I have to step over a threshold just inside the door, it makes
the first step *really* big for me. I'm interested in having new "user
friendly" steps put in over the existing ones.

I had a contractor that I've used before look at them, just to build
plain wood steps over the existing steps, using Trex. He originally
quoted me $450 for the two, or $420 if I did it with plain wood. Then
the other day he came by and looked at them again and sent me an email
that he'd realized he couldn't do them as he'd originally planned with
stringers and needed to use a "box method" and that "there is more
material required with this method so the new price would be $750.00."

So questions - shouldn't he have realized what type of design he'd need
when he first measured the steps and quoted on it? And should the
difference really be $300 for additional material? And most importantly,
what would a reasonable price (range) be for two sets of steps (3 steps
each) in the Baltimore area? I was happy with the $450 although a male
relative told me he thought it was too much since it would "only need
$50 worth of material". I wouldn't be asking here about the original
price, but I'm confused by the $300 increase. (It's not the cost of
Trex, because the orig price specified a $30 reduction if he used
unfinished lumber).

Current steps -http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/v704/lurkerlee/problem%20areas/?act...

As has been said, the present steps are a code violation and as you
have said, not comfortable or safe.
Is there a drawing or written description of what the contractor is to
build?
As I see it,the contractor wants to build a code compliant landing at
the door, then the steps.
He originally had in mind a set of steps without landing.
T

"Lee" wrote in message
. ..

I know every place and situation is different, just trying to figure if
this is reasonable. (And someone's not pulling something over on a naive
home owner).

New to me house has a "sun room" built across the back of the house. There
are two separate sets of cement steps from the house to the room. The
steps are very awkward for me. I'm 5' tall, and the distance from the door
to the first step is like 9-1/2", and different on the other. And since I
have to step over a threshold just inside the door, it makes the first
step *really* big for me. I'm interested in having new "user friendly"
steps put in over the existing ones.

I had a contractor that I've used before look at them, just to build plain
wood steps over the existing steps, using Trex. He originally quoted me
$450 for the two, or $420 if I did it with plain wood. Then the other day
he came by and looked at them again and sent me an email that he'd
realized he couldn't do them as he'd originally planned with stringers and
needed to use a "box method" and that "there is more material required
with this method so the new price would be $750.00."

So questions - shouldn't he have realized what type of design he'd need
when he first measured the steps and quoted on it? And should the
difference really be $300 for additional material? And most importantly,
what would a reasonable price (range) be for two sets of steps (3 steps
each) in the Baltimore area? I was happy with the $450 although a male
relative told me he thought it was too much since it would "only need $50
worth of material". I wouldn't be asking here about the original price,
but I'm confused by the $300 increase. (It's not the cost of Trex, because
the orig price specified a $30 reduction if he used unfinished lumber).

Current steps -
http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/v7...kwardsteps.jpg

Crap, man. Where are you? I'd be happy to do it for $700.

Steve

What is the height from the floor of the sun room to the floor inside the
house?

Go to Lowes or Home Depot and take a careful look at what they have in the
treated lumber section for 3-step stringers and treads. You may find that
you can buy two 3-step stringers and 3 treads for each set of steps and nail
or screw them together to make new steps. Or, a handyman can do the same
thing for you.

http://www.lowes.com/lowes/lkn?actio...il=&lpage=none

Depending on the width of the current steps, the new steps may even be able
to be built right around and over the existing steps without taking the old
ones out -- although that would be, and would look, tacky.

"Lee" wrote in message
. ..

I know every place and situation is different, just trying to figure if
this is reasonable. (And someone's not pulling something over on a naive
home owner).

New to me house has a "sun room" built across the back of the house. There
are two separate sets of cement steps from the house to the room. The
steps are very awkward for me. I'm 5' tall, and the distance from the door
to the first step is like 9-1/2", and different on the other. And since I
have to step over a threshold just inside the door, it makes the first
step *really* big for me. I'm interested in having new "user friendly"
steps put in over the existing ones.

I had a contractor that I've used before look at them, just to build plain
wood steps over the existing steps, using Trex. He originally quoted me
$450 for the two, or $420 if I did it with plain wood. Then the other day
he came by and looked at them again and sent me an email that he'd
realized he couldn't do them as he'd originally planned with stringers and
needed to use a "box method" and that "there is more material required
with this method so the new price would be $750.00."

So questions - shouldn't he have realized what type of design he'd need
when he first measured the steps and quoted on it? And should the
difference really be $300 for additional material? And most importantly,
what would a reasonable price (range) be for two sets of steps (3 steps
each) in the Baltimore area? I was happy with the $450 although a male
relative told me he thought it was too much since it would "only need $50
worth of material". I wouldn't be asking here about the original price,
but I'm confused by the $300 increase. (It's not the cost of Trex, because
the orig price specified a $30 reduction if he used unfinished lumber).

Current steps -
http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/v7...kwardsteps.jpg

wrote

Current
steps -http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/v704/lurkerlee/problem%20areas/?act...

As has been said, the present steps are a code violation and as you
have said, not comfortable or safe.

Yes. Looks like original outdoor ones. Would not be code compliant now for
exterior either but would have been grandfathered. Once the room was built
around them, then local code compliancy comes to question. They may no
longer be grandfathered? Area dependant.

Example, when I had my sunroom redone, we were required to upgrade a door
lintel and electrical to current standards. Both were grandfathered before
but not on a rebuilt room.

Is there a drawing or written description of what the contractor is to
build?

As I see it,the contractor wants to build a code compliant landing at
the door, then the steps.
He originally had in mind a set of steps without landing.

I'd add to make sure the fellow knows his codes. This can be a costly
mistake if it has to be redone.

I agree with Alta47 as well, unless the existing steps are so covered you
cant tell thery are there, it's gonna look tacky. Encasing with brickwork
over them (leading to 2 taller steps) is the only untacky way besides
encasing completely in wood, that I can think of. All other methods I can
think of involve removal of the cement steps.

On Sep 13, 1:49*pm, Lee wrote:
I know every place and situation is different, just trying to figure if
this is reasonable. (And someone's not pulling something over on a naive
home owner).

New to me house has a "sun room" built across the back of the house.
There are two separate sets of cement steps from the house to the room.
The steps are very awkward for me. I'm 5' tall, and the distance from
the door to the first step is like 9-1/2", and different on the other.
And since I have to step over a threshold just inside the door, it makes
the first step *really* big for me. I'm interested in having new "user
friendly" steps put in over the existing ones.

I had a contractor that I've used before look at them, just to build
plain wood steps over the existing steps, using Trex. He originally
quoted me $450 for the two, or $420 if I did it with plain wood. Then
the other day he came by and looked at them again and sent me an email
that he'd realized he couldn't do them as he'd originally planned with
stringers and needed to use a "box method" and that "there is more
material required with this method so the new price would be $750.00."

So questions - shouldn't he have realized what type of design he'd need
when he first measured the steps and quoted on it? And should the
difference really be $300 for additional material? And most importantly,
what would a reasonable price (range) be for two sets of steps (3 steps
each) in the Baltimore area? I was happy with the $450 although a male
relative told me he thought it was too much since it would "only need
$50 worth of material". I wouldn't be asking here about the original
price, but I'm confused by the $300 increase. (It's not the cost of
Trex, because the orig price specified a $30 reduction if he used
unfinished lumber).

Current steps -http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/v704/lurkerlee/problem%20areas/?act...

Given your situation, I'd probably spend a bit more money and remove
both offending piles of ugly concrete and install at least one set of
steps that would be at the side of an appropriate small landing and
railing assembly. Or maybe a landing with steps on either side would
look nicer. Two such additions to the room might be more than you
need, so space could be gained by eliminating the seldom used entry.
Make some sketches and work with your contractor on pricing. Railings
and proper steps will be very nice to live with, especially if the
steps follow the commonly preferred 7" rise and 11" run. HTH

Joe

"Joe" wrote

space could be gained by eliminating the seldom used entry.
Make some sketches and work with your contractor on pricing. Railings
and proper steps will be very nice to live with, especially if the
steps follow the commonly preferred 7" rise and 11" run. HTH

Caution if I understand you to eliminate the door steps. It may be a code
issue in the case of 2 egresses per room. Codes arent always logical.

Where I am, the only thing that makes my egress 'legal' from the 3rd bedroom
which has no window, is the origional exterior door that now leads to a
sunroom. This may be the same as what she has (not mentioned is the room
the sunroom leads to inside the house).

The sun room is 'legal' because of the patio door and windows. Happens to
also have another door which we refit to proper lintels and exterior coded
door. (Inspectors quibble on that one here, and some say exterior coded
door is overkill while others mandate it due to the screened porch on that
side).

cshenk wrote:
wrote

Current
steps -http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/v704/lurkerlee/problem%20areas/?act...

As has been said, the present steps are a code violation and as you
have said, not comfortable or safe.

Yes. Looks like original outdoor ones. Would not be code compliant now for
exterior either but would have been grandfathered. Once the room was built
around them, then local code compliancy comes to question. They may no
longer be grandfathered? Area dependant.

Example, when I had my sunroom redone, we were required to upgrade a door
lintel and electrical to current standards. Both were grandfathered before
but not on a rebuilt room.

Is there a drawing or written description of what the contractor is to
build?

As I see it,the contractor wants to build a code compliant landing at
the door, then the steps.
He originally had in mind a set of steps without landing.

I'd add to make sure the fellow knows his codes. This can be a costly
mistake if it has to be redone.

I agree with Alta47 as well, unless the existing steps are so covered you
cant tell thery are there, it's gonna look tacky. Encasing with brickwork
over them (leading to 2 taller steps) is the only untacky way besides
encasing completely in wood, that I can think of. All other methods I can
think of involve removal of the cement steps.


Thank you all for the comments. Yes, I'm pretty sure these were the
original cement steps to the outside, and at some point, someone added
on the sunroom with the cement floor (which I assume is why the last
step is so shallow). All of the houses in this neighborhood seem to have
two sets of back steps.

What I'm envisioning, although now that you mention it, I need to be
sure that's explicit, is that the cement steps would be completely
covered by the wooden ones.

Interestingly, I actually did have a mason cover the front steps in
brick (same problem). He added a "landing" or at least a very small drop
to the top step. He did a beautiful job, but to me, brick steps are sort
of "outdoorsy", and thought wood would make it more of a room...but heck
they would be nicer than cement! He did give me a quote on doing both
sets of steps in the sunroom, but that was 2400! I'm not sure the steps
are quite that annoying yet. (I'm still trying to sell my old house, so
every dollar counts right now).

I'm assuming that having the current cement steps removed would be a big
deal? I may have to rethink the brick approach.

(Oh, and BTW, the male relative is my younger brother. I'm not asking
him to do the steps because he never finished projects he started in my
old house 20 years ago, LOL).

"Lee" wrote
cshenk wrote:

Yes. Looks like original outdoor ones. Would not be code compliant now
for exterior either but would have been grandfathered. Once the room was
built around them, then local code compliancy comes to question. They
may no longer be grandfathered? Area dependant.

Did your inspection when you got the house mention these? I gather the
sunroom was there then. If added sunroom afterwards, you have no
grandfather for the steps when you sell this house.

I'd add to make sure the fellow knows his codes. This can be a costly
mistake if it has to be redone.

I agree with Alta47 as well, unless the existing steps are so covered you
cant tell thery are there, it's gonna look tacky. Encasing with
brickwork over them (leading to 2 taller steps) is the only untacky way
besides encasing completely in wood, that I can think of. All other
methods I can think of involve removal of the cement steps.

Thank you all for the comments. Yes, I'm pretty sure these were the
original cement steps to the outside, and at some point, someone added on
the sunroom with the cement floor (which I assume is why the last step is
so shallow). All of the houses in this neighborhood seem to have two sets
of back steps.

Yes, would have been construction of the times and grandfathered code.
Quite a bit of my house has that still so we are familiar with it. If I
renovate my bathrooms for example, I am reqiuired to add electrical outlets
(there are none there now).

What I'm envisioning, although now that you mention it, I need to be sure
that's explicit, is that the cement steps would be completely covered by
the wooden ones.

That was my first assumption.

Interestingly, I actually did have a mason cover the front steps in brick
(same problem). He added a "landing" or at least a very small drop to the
top step. He did a beautiful job, but to me, brick steps are sort of
"outdoorsy", and thought wood would make it more of a room...but heck they
would be nicer than cement! He did give me a quote on doing both sets of
steps in the sunroom, but that was 2400! I'm not sure the steps are quite
that annoying yet. (I'm still trying to sell my old house, so every dollar
counts right now).

From the apparent dimensions, it looked do-able for me in brick.

I've never had one house on sale same time as living in a new one but I can
understand that.

I'm assuming that having the current cement steps removed would be a big
deal? I may have to rethink the brick approach.

No, not really. They should have been chopped out before the new slab was
laid that low but it's much less expensive to remove them now than to reslab
the rest higher especially if it will make the ceiling too low.

(Oh, and BTW, the male relative is my younger brother. I'm not asking him
to do the steps because he never finished projects he started in my old
house 20 years ago, LOL).

LOL! Gotcha! Yeah, not a best pick there!