Are there any hard and fast rules in the building regs that state, for a
standard 2 storey domestic dwelling...

1) How big an external rear door (that you might need to get out of in the
event of a fire) needs to be, e.g. 78" x 30" min or whatever?

2) Whether a 2nd WC (1st WC being inside in a bathroom) can be a downstairs
outside loo (ie no internal access).

Or would any issues along these lines be down to the opinion of a building
inspector?

Paul.

On Wed, 3 Sep 2003 12:51:11 -0000, a particular chimpanzee named "Paul
Clarke" randomly hit the keyboard and
produced:

Are there any hard and fast rules in the building regs that state, for a
standard 2 storey domestic dwelling...

1) How big an external rear door (that you might need to get out of in the
event of a fire) needs to be, e.g. 78" x 30" min or whatever?

2) Whether a 2nd WC (1st WC being inside in a bathroom) can be a downstairs
outside loo (ie no internal access).

Depends whether the house is existing or a new-build.

For new-builds, there are requirements that at least one entrance door
(ideally, the one closest to the parking) is wide enough for a
wheelchair and has a level threshold. An 838mm standard doorleaf is
usually needed. There also has to be an internal WC on the ground
floor.

For existing houses, the only requirement is that there is at least
one internal WC. Where you put another one is down to yourself.
--
Hugo Nebula
"You know, I'd rather see this on TV,
Tones it down" - Laurie Anderson

"Paul Clarke" wrote in message
...
Are there any hard and fast rules in the building regs that state, for a
standard 2 storey domestic dwelling...

1) How big an external rear door (that you might need to get out of in the
event of a fire) needs to be, e.g. 78" x 30" min or whatever?

2) Whether a 2nd WC (1st WC being inside in a bathroom) can be a
downstairs
outside loo (ie no internal access).

Or would any issues along these lines be down to the opinion of a building
inspector?

Paul.

I'm intrigued by your title and the use of the term 'Bog Standard' (as in
'Bog Standard Comprehensives', etc?)

BOG was originally derived from the expression British Or German, as these
were the only respectable standards in the world at one time, so it should
be a complimentary expression!
BAH

Hugo Nebula wrote:

On Wed, 3 Sep 2003 12:51:11 -0000, a particular chimpanzee named "Paul
Clarke" randomly hit the keyboard and
produced:

Are there any hard and fast rules in the building regs that state, for a
standard 2 storey domestic dwelling...

1) How big an external rear door (that you might need to get out of in the
event of a fire) needs to be, e.g. 78" x 30" min or whatever?

2) Whether a 2nd WC (1st WC being inside in a bathroom) can be a downstairs
outside loo (ie no internal access).

Depends whether the house is existing or a new-build.

For new-builds, there are requirements that at least one entrance door
(ideally, the one closest to the parking) is wide enough for a
wheelchair and has a level threshold. An 838mm standard doorleaf is
usually needed. There also has to be an internal WC on the ground
floor.

For existing houses, the only requirement is that there is at least
one internal WC. Where you put another one is down to yourself.

Another piece of blanket legislation that, seemingly, has no scope for
flexibility to allow it to be applied sensibly in a given situation.

A neighbour has just demolished half of his bungalow and is now building
an extension at the rear to replace what has been demolished. When
that's done, he's building a new house on the plot created by the
demolition. As the plot slopes down slightly from front to rear he
intended to put a split-level through lounge/dining room in both
properties but, because of all these regs, he can't do it in the new one
but can in the existing one (because it is an alteration/extension).

The daft thing about this is that when the project is finished he (who
isn't disabled, nor are any of his family or friends) will live in the
new regulation-compliant house and the old bungalow is going on the
market, possibly to be bought by a disabled person who needs the
features that the regs provide.

On Wed, 03 Sep 2003 21:36:03 +0000, a particular chimpanzee named
parish parish_AT_ntlworld.com randomly hit the keyboard and
produced:

Hugo Nebula wrote:

For new-builds, there are requirements that at least one entrance door
(ideally, the one closest to the parking) is wide enough for a
wheelchair and has a level threshold.

Another piece of blanket legislation that, seemingly, has no scope for
flexibility to allow it to be applied sensibly in a given situation.

Does he know if any of those friends or relatives will never find
themselves in a wheelchair? Is he or they immune to disease or
accidents? What about the people who live in the house after him?
For significant periods of their lives a great many people are
disabled by a lack of reasonable access to 'conventionally designed'
dwellings, such as mothers with push chairs, temporary disability or
even old age. The requirements for access to dwellings are there to
allow more people the freedom to leave their own house and visit
others.

There is flexibility in the Approved Document for split level houses
and those on steep sites.
--
Hugo Nebula
"You know, I'd rather see this on TV,
Tones it down" - Laurie Anderson

Hugo Nebula wrote:

On Wed, 03 Sep 2003 21:36:03 +0000, a particular chimpanzee named
parish parish_AT_ntlworld.com randomly hit the keyboard and
produced:

Hugo Nebula wrote:

For new-builds, there are requirements that at least one entrance door
(ideally, the one closest to the parking) is wide enough for a
wheelchair and has a level threshold.

Another piece of blanket legislation that, seemingly, has no scope for
flexibility to allow it to be applied sensibly in a given situation.

Does he know if any of those friends or relatives will never find
themselves in a wheelchair? Is he or they immune to disease or
accidents? What about the people who live in the house after him?
For significant periods of their lives a great many people are
disabled by a lack of reasonable access to 'conventionally designed'
dwellings, such as mothers with push chairs, temporary disability or
even old age. The requirements for access to dwellings are there to
allow more people the freedom to leave their own house and visit
others.


I see these regulations as a money saving scheme by the Govt. It will
save them money by not having to pay (through grants and benefits) for
modifications to houses for people with special needs. That is what the
Welfare State is about. Don't anyone get me wrong, I'm not advocating
discrimination against the disabled but I object to have restrictions
imposed for these reasons. It's another sympton of a creeping malaise
thats pushing this country down the toilet.

There is flexibility in the Approved Document for split level houses
and those on steep sites.

Well, they weren't flexible in my neighbours case (or maybe that was
just our LA, North Wilts).

If you bought a plot of land to build a house on that would have
stunning views from the first floor, you may well wish to build the
house "upside down" with the reception rooms upstairs and the bedrooms
downstairs. How flexible would the regulations be in that situation?