Landing & door regs for the first floor door (double story extension)

[Chaji]

Have you got the room to pull the staircase forward to create a flat landing?

In my opinion it would make your extension feel more part of the house rather than an add on.

I'm no expert on building regs but if you have young children then having the layout like that all looks a bit dangerous to me.

(Sorry not the greatest picture so hopefully they are not confusing)
Please have a look the image mate - there is plenty of space in the existing landing area for the attic staircase to land. Pretty sure I would not need that in the new extension (left hand side).

 

[A_Novice]

What's behind the wall at the end of the stairs?

Have you got the full layout of upstairs to hand?

Downstairs plan would help as well

 

[tony1851]

Two suggestions if i may, to improve safety:

1. hinge the door on the right (when viewed from inside the room).
2. consider a vertical grab handle on the left (viewed from the existing stairs).

 

[Chaji]

Tony, would this work pls? (Was not sure what you meant by right side)

Full first floor layout (original) below:

 

[Leofric]

What do you guys think?

I have said what I think - it doesn't work. What does the Building Control Officer think about compliance with building regulations for this configuration of stairs ,plus creating a hazard near the top of a flight of stairs

 

[tony1851]

I have said what I think - it doesn't work. What does the Building Control Officer think about compliance with building regulations for this configuration of stairs ,plus creating a hazard near the top of a flight of stairs

How would you get round it?

 

[^woody^]

I have said what I think - it doesn't work. What does the Building Control Officer think about compliance with building regulations for this configuration of stairs ,plus creating a hazard near the top of a flight of stairs

Ahem, it does work and there's thousands of these around, probably more. I'll have a count.

 

[Leofric]

Ahem, it does work and there's thousands of these around, probably more. I'll have a count.

Lots of things might be considered to work if you ignore building regulations and no doubt there are thousands of bodged jobs around but there is no accounting for bodgers or other people's incompetence

 

[^woody^]

Lots of things might be considered to work if you ignore building regulations and no doubt there are thousands of bodged jobs around but there is no accounting for bodgers or other people's incompetence

Done. Dusted. Approved.

 

[Leofric]

How would you get round it?

Maybe you can't get around it with that staircase configuration in a satisfactory way without taking an unacceptable amount of space out of the new bedroom on the left to provide access to the other new room ,or relocating the bathroom to provide access through the existing bathroom space to the new room on the right , but these things should have been considered at the design stage before going too far.

 

[Leofric]

Done. Dusted. Approved.

Ah, but who by, has the spaniel given the nod
Let's hope for Chaji's sake the BCO agrees.
(I only try and point out how I think things should be done the proper way )

 

[A_Novice]

What's the layout downstairs. If you have room you could replace the staircase with straight steps brought forward 3 or so steps so it forms a flat landing at the top rather than the ankle breaker configuration you currently have planned.

My neighbour did this and it worked well although it may take a chunk out of your bathroom as head room will have to be maintained.

 

[tony1851]

What might have been a better solution would be to extend the lower winder step left through the thickness of the wall, so that the two
risers were pushed further back. This would give a larger 'landing' to step on while ascending or descending. But at this stage it would mean
cutting a trimmer into the floor - probably too late now.

The door would be better hinged as shown, so that you are not faced with a sudden drop when opening the door; it would also aid safety
if there was to be a vertical grab-handle.

All this aside, I doubt an inspector could point to any rule or guidance in AD K which would prohibit the present set-up. Para 1.20 states that there should be a landing (equal in depth to the width of the stairs) at the top and bottom of every flight. But in the definitions section, a flight is described as 'a series of steps'; the single step which the OP has does not therefore constitute a flight, so doesn't need an unobstructed landing at the top.