Building reg drawings - will this do?

[tony1851]

having closing / sealing fire doors protecting the hallway and stairs from filling with smoke starts to become much more attractive.

Agreed, but currently there is no requirement for full 30-minute fire doors (seals/self-closers etc) in a dwelling - except for an integral garage.

 

[tony1851]

deleted - double post

 

[^woody^]

I was told this inspector is sympathetic to interlinked smoke detection in rooms to avoid that

Being told, and then instructing them to be told something different is something to bear in mind.

There is normally no alternative to a protected route if such a route is simple to devise. The problems with alternative suppression or early warning is that those systems need to be maintained and checked etc and may well be disconnected or not work for one reason or another when needed. So, any alternative to the simple option must be justified - and "I'd rather not change my nice doors because that will cost a lot" is perhaps not a good reason.

So you can either take the chance and go with someone who you think may be lenient, or you can instruct a suitable fire safety consultant to devise a scheme or a valid reason to justify things in line with the relevant b/regs requirement.

But it may be that if the doors are substantial enough (panel doors may not be) then they could be deemed nominal fire doors, and along with other measures could be acceptable. But you need to know the regulations and aspects of fire safety to be able to argue that.

In more general terms, it's wrong to think of "what can I get away with", but "what should I do for me and my family". Yes there are costs, but are they worth paying, and what might be the costs of not paying them. And generally if something is important to you, such as keeping the existing doors, then that should be dealt with beforehand and not left to chance after making an application.

And if say a suppression system is installed, what will that say to future potential buyers, their surveyors, or insurers? Does that mean there is something very high risk to be avoided, or just a cautious homeowner?

 

[Dodgyrog]

I appreciate the thoughts on fire safety…. I too am acutely aware of fire in my job , but fire doors on every room on the escape route are only any good if every door is shut of a night time. Very few people do this. Plus, fires most of the time occur in the kitchen and from people smoking and unattended candles. A fire isn’t going to break out in my lounge or spare room….

I understand the need for fire safety, a generic approach is required to stop daft developments going ahead….. but I’m after doing things properly and safely with a little bit of flexibility to maintain some aesthetics, keep costs down, whilst still being safe and reasonably sensible.

Don’t for a second think fire safety is not a concern of mine, or that I’m being flippant about it….. But I do understand your point.

Never intended to infer you being flippant - more so to reiterate how touchy the regs folk can be. I wouldn't want you to end up having to backtrack having built something under a building notice and being made to tear down - as opposed to having peace of mind from upfront plans submittal. I'm like you by the sound of it, a true DIY'er that only really wants to put money in to tangible timber, bricks and mortar rather than "unnecessary" drawing / consultant fees etc. I'm currently walking on the wild side with my garage conversion but an attractive loft conversion option I have will be put in others hands if I do go for it...... and I live in a bungalow