Look at these stairs

Joined
16 Sep 2006
Messages
4,437
Reaction score
870
Location
Fife
Country
United Kingdom
I was watching a Homes Under the Hammer last night. One of the properties featured was an old upstairs flat with external stairs to reach it. Hopefully the pics do it justice, it was quite a height. I noticed the staircase only had two metal balusters running at the same angle as the staircase, one near the top, one near the bottom, meaning a gap between. I couldn't quite believe, given the height, there wasn't at least another baluster between the existing two, or maybe some vertical ones to block the opening off.

Surely in its current form, a toddler could quite easily reach through the gap and then ...

Is it a case of 'that would never be passed today but because it's existing, it's okay' ?

stairs pic 1.jpgstairs pic 2.jpg
 
Sponsored Links
Isn't it the case that BR are not retrospective? Think of all the farmhouses converted from longhouses which had and and still have stone external, unguarded stairs...
 
Isn't it the case that BR are not retrospective? Think of all the farmhouses converted from longhouses which had and and still have stone external, unguarded stairs...

Exactly.
sounds like the OP expects every historic building to be updated to modern standards and covered with high viz

Take a closer look, there's nothing historic about that staircase.
 
Sponsored Links
Stop trying to spoil kids sense of adventure. Imagine the fun you could have on them as a 6-10 year old and letting your imagination run wild as to what it could be. A steep climb up Mt Everest or K-19 for example. A rocky outcrop in the wild west so you can shoot the indians down below.
Your imagination is the only limit and it's a sure-fire way of teaching you what pain is and how to avoid it in future.

Having said that, I wouldn't let my grandkids out there on their own till they were quite older.
 
Exactly.
sounds like the OP expects every historic building to be updated to modern standards and covered with high viz
Suggest you read my opening post again, in particular this part:

is it a case of 'that would never be passed today but because it's existing, it's okay' ?

Why do some folk on this forum insist on reimagining what people ask? It's almost as if some are desperate to start an argument when that's not the intention of the OP. I'm not suggesting every historic property is updated to current standards. It simply struck me that it's quite exposed. And I wonder if the local council would have anything to say if the new owner intends to rent it out, given all the hoops landlords need to jump through these days to comply with various legislation.
 
Take a closer look, there's nothing historic about that staircase.
Yeah I did wonder about that. If it has been rebuilt in the relatively recent past, why didn't they slap a middle railing in to close it off a bit more.
 
Haven't looked but isn't there a "100mm ball" regulation? Inside or out, afaikr. Which vast numbers of houses don't conform to.
 
Stop trying to spoil kids sense of adventure. Imagine the fun you could have on them as a 6-10 year old and letting your imagination run wild as to what it could be. A steep climb up Mt Everest or K-19 for example. A rocky outcrop in the wild west so you can shoot the indians down below.
Your imagination is the only limit and it's a sure-fire way of teaching you what pain is and how to avoid it in future.
If you have to be a kid to do all that . . . . Then my life is over.
 
Haven't looked but isn't there a "100mm ball" regulation? Inside or out, afaikr. Which vast numbers of houses don't conform to.
Yes A 100mm sphere must not pass through any gap. Height of handrail, balusters, spindles, treads, risers, min headroom, max pitch etc, are all regulated for the installation of NEW stairs.
 
Sponsored Links
Back
Top