The two quibbles I would have with the project are:

It is expected that all risers are of uniform height. Given this is a new job supposedly occurring to fix that problem, I would not like the mismatched riser result!

The skinny walk going to the new nice, wide landing and stoop looks out of proportion to the house. The walk should have expanded in size relative to the porch.

Yardvaark, I agree and specifically spoke with the owner about the step height earlier this week. He told me the new step would be 1/2 the height of the old one, 7/7 in other words. Would you expect him to fix this?

What do you think about the use of the versalok with inset pavers?

regarding the walkway, at first we were doing to re-do that then decided not to. It may be done later.

Also, Yardvaark: Thank You.

I would expect uniform steps but I would also be having him build them according to a drawing that I provided specifying exactly what work was to be done. It doesn't sound like you had such a drawing or specifications. Without them, the contractor has a lot of leeway to solve problems in the way he sees fit. Often it doesn't jive with what the homeowner wants. And when it comes to disagreements about things that aren't written down, all bets are off. All of this depends on your contract.

Sorry, I don't like it either. I would have chosen brick. It looks like you can hide most of it with medium height ground cover.

I am not sure if that stoop is considered a stair but I do not think it meets the requirement for riser height. I would trip there for sure.

Emmarene, bummer but thanks for the honest opinion. The first step is 6.5" (minimum is 4 from what I looked up) and the second is 8" (max 7 or 7 3/4 not sure).
The landscaper and I had discussed many times that the steps would be even heights, but to Yardvaark's point it was not in writing.
The materials ended up being his recommendation and after many changes I just went with it. We could not get the exact same brick (house built in '98), and he said a close match wouldn't look good, and that it would be cost prohibitive to get a brick mason for such a small job.
There is a product called Super Thin Pavers, 1" thick which come in brick color and blends. What about covering the entire top with that?
*Sigh*. Believe it or not I have planned and reworked this project for the better part of a year! I am just so frustrated that things can't go right despite spending what I feel is ridiculous sum of money.

I think its very pretty and I like the materials and think they go well with the house.

It does not seem like the steps variations would be too big of an issue as each section kinda has a landing. Wouldn't someone need to step up, take a step and then step up again?

I like it, it's pretty and interesting, and ties in well with the lovely bed border. I also think decorating it will enhance it a lot. Off to the left on the ledge, a big beautiful pot, or seating (small bench or chair), pots around the front door, etc.

But, you have to live with it, and if you think it will keep bothering you, I'd change it. Just do it for you, not what your neighbor thinks. :)

If there's a material that is a good match to the existing brick that could cover the pavers and block, and is thin enough not to raise the bottom step too high (sounds like only about an inch), then I would say do it. It would solve the height problem and also simplify the number of visible materials. Lay some out first and make sure it's not going to be too high, though.

There's enough separation between the two steps that it's probably not a code issue, but 8" steps kind of suck for the elderly or those with mobility issues. Why in the heck wouldn't they raise the first step up enough to give you 7s? That's called "we don't plan our work in advance."

Aesthetically I don't love the design, but I'm guessing you got what you signed up for so there's not a lot to be done at this point.Any changes, you'll be out of pocket.

How did the builder ever get a certificate of occupancy with the original step that massive? Is the county inspector the builder's dad or something?

I don't think you should spend much money to fix it. It isn't perfect but once you fill in the beds it will be fine. You won't even notice.

Your contractor did it wrong. You never leave retaining wall blocks like that. They ALWAYS have a cap block. You never vary the height of steps. It's a load of hooey that it doesn't apply if there's a landing. If a guest stumbles and falls, you can bet their insurance company will hold you liable for a sub-code installation. The mix of materials is poor, too. Why didn't he just grade the soil so that an additional step wouldn't be needed? He could have integrated a retaining wall on the outside of the sidewalk, and brought the sidewalk right up to your porch.

Sorry, but you got a slipshod contractor.

@Metro East - seems odd that you'd have such a hard time finding a match on a home that can't be more than 20-30 years old. My brick supplier will actually go to the home and if there's not a perfect match, he'll suggest the next closest. We're doing a 1920s home that way right now.

And yes, bricklaying is a specialized skill. Lego block landscaping like the versalock blocks were created to let companies without skilled masons build walls and steps.

I dont think putting a 1" thick overlay paver or thin brick over the first step would look good as thin pavers/bricks are not intended to be used for top of risers. I would have the contractor raise the whole landing so the riser heights are within 3/8" of each other (which is code). Just remove all the pieces, lay down some aggregate, re-compact, and relay all the pieces just as they are but about an inch higher. Hold him to his word that he said the risers would be equal. If he backpeddles, then plan to play hard ball . Little things like that would bug me not just because of the flaw, but because I didnt have the chutzpah to stand up to the contractor.

I didn't mention code re: the variation in riser heights because I was pretty sure it refers to a flight of stairs. Landing to landing is sort of a fuzzy gray area. Not that I think this installer has read the code, but I hate using code as an argument and getting the rug yanked out from under me.

That said, what IS in the International Residential Code under R311.7 is that riser heights cannot exceed 7.75". So you have some leverage there.

And I totally agree with JSL that while it's a little bit of work, it's not so much work that I'd accept them not doing it. Out of curiosity did they caulk between the house and the new landing?

JLS and RG:

I don't think I want to use thin pavers either. I'm getting used to the look. The border of the versalok gives it a bit of interest. I appreciate the advice to hold him to what he said would be done, ie risers equal heights. With that second step being 8" out of the gate, I am worried that the aggregate they did lay it on will settle over time, and in a few years I will have an 8.5" step.

They did not caulk between the house and the new landing. There is a locking type of sand (forget what it's called) filling those cracks just like in between the pavers/versalok capstones all over the step/landing. Should it be caulked? Clear caulk I guess?

water is the enemy. What we normally do is get a caulk close in color to the sand, run a bead of it down in the joint between structure and landing, and then dust it with the sand so it matches everything else. Since they didn't, just keep an eye on that joint. If you see it widening it'll need caulked.

As a homeowner, I would never accept that work. Steps of different height even when widely spaced, are a trip hazard, forcing your guests to look down as they approach your door. Just too awkward.

I think the only code issue that applies here is the riser height which yes, RG, is 7 3/4" so even if the other riser is off, it still complies with code because these are not considered stairs which my understanding is any set of steps that are at least 3 in succession are considered stairs and must comply with applicable codes (like a hand rail and riser height conformity). But regardless of code, the riser heights are just too far off for any reputable contractor to think they did a decent job. Codes for steps and stairs are for safety concerns, and everybody knows riser heights with different heights in succession cause the brain to get confused. Especially for the elderly. I suggest you put aesthetics aside and focus on safety, workmanship and the integrity of your contractor to do the right thing.

JSL ... so well said!

@JSL I'm not advocating for this crappy install, just pointing out that the wrong argument can backfire.

Thank you JSL for the further information.

Update: He looked at it and he would like to fix by correcting the slope of the landing. It is 3' wide and he wants to gain 3/4" of elevation with a slope. From my reading max slope is 2% or 1/4" per foot so this just works. That is the plan for now.