Looks like the right post is longer than the left one---I do not know of any reason for that, unless there is a reason at the top of the left railing.

It's difficult to tell exactly from the picture but to me it looks as if the newel is cut shorter on the left side.
Usually when you have a railing with the scroll on the end like this one, you eliminate the newel (post) and just bring your pilasters on down and around the outside of the scroll. I hope this link works. the picture isn't exactly like yours but it will give you an idea of how it should have been done. http://www.wm.edu/wmcar/Hopewell2003/stair.jpg

Here is a link that might be useful: {{!gwi}}

Hi,
The railing man was between a rock and a hard place. This is a very strange design. The rail/newel that continues on would normally be mounted on the floor, not on a tread, but that would not match your turnout/volute standing atop the drum tread. So he placed both of them up on the tread. The difference in height arises because the transition for the right newel has a different horizontal space requirement than the volute on the left. Check to see if the baluster length is the same. If they are not, it's a mistake, if they are, it's just a very poor design/specification. People don't know how to design staircase landings any more. If the descending landing nosing was more closely in line with the ascending tread, you could have put the right-hand newel centered on the riser, and then a straight horizontal run over to a cap 90 for the next flight down. that would also have eliminated the mitered gooseneck/vertical drop section.
Casey

That's odd.

Are the left and right railings the same height above the nosing of the stairs risers, or is the right one higher?

Mongo

Like a CIRCULAR stairway?? I must have been absent for geometry class that week. Don't buy the story, or accept the stairs with two different railing heights. The stairs look like they are nicely done, too bad the guy did not understand how to run handrail. They should be the same height aboove the stair tread. He is right in that you need the configuration of fittings on the right, because code requires that the handrail is "continious" , so it cannot terminate with a matching volute and then pick up again at the lower stairs. These kind of designs pose a real challenge and require lots of thought and layout, and always look awkward, but the height mismatch is wrong.

I'm not usually on this board but this subject caught my eye. Not to hijack your thread, but I've had this lingering thought about my handrails, too. One of my posts is higher than the other at the landing, but I just assumed they had to do it this way to continue the handrail at the right height.

Can someone please tell me whether mine is wrong? Thanks!

and now from the other side:

Lucy, I'm no carpenter, but it *does* look really really weird. I'm sorry!

Meg711,

Your railing looks fine.

Meg711,
The posts have to be differnet since you are turning an inside corner.

To the OP, the posts should have been matched at installation.
Someone ordered the wrong parts.
The gooseneck to the next run of stairs is neded on these corners, but the post should have ben trimmed and the rails should be at the same height on each side (it appears the tops of the posts are not even).

Lucy, I'm not sure I understand what your problem is. Are you saying if you took a level and laid it across the newels at the bottom of your stairs that the one would be taller than the other? If so than that's not right. If it's level and just looks lopsided due to the angle you took the pictures from than I'd say it was done correctly. Do you have a picture taken standing straight in front of the bottom step? If so I would like to see it. That would help with the perspective.
~Justie~

Meg, You are right, because of the turn of your stairs it's the only way it could have been done to allow the railings to be at the correct height.

Thanks! And whew! I can't believe that something was done correctly. Sorry about the snarkiness; just overall frustration at the quality of some of the trim work.

Thanks for posting though. Good luck Lucy.

Meg, I can't tell by the pictures because of their angle. But, as someone mentioned earlier, if your balusters (that's the white square pieces running from your railing to the stair treads) are different in length, then your stairs are wrong. There is absolutely no reason that I've ever come across that requires parralel stair railings to be of different heights.
I always made the top of my railings 34 inches from the treads but I think most codes allow up to 38 inches but they must be equal on both sides.

daveh644,

My balusters are not different heights--just the posts at the landing. But someone explained that it is correct. That one post has to be higher so that the railing up the stairs is at the right height.

Or did you mean to post the comment for Lucy?