It won't be safe, although this has nothing to do with floor strength
or other minor points. The usual reason for avoiding Building
Regulations on converted lofts is because the conversion won't meet
fire safety standards. It's not unusual to find a completely
unprotected stairwell and an open plan kitchen/living room.

SNIP

Some very interesting points there Peter, thanks - I am a wiser man.

I looked at a job last week, in a loft conversion. Proper stairs went up
from the landing, solid wall one side, handrail the other side.

The stairs emerged roughly in the middle of the conversion. The stairwell
was 'boxed in' on three sides by a waist high solid partition. No door at
the bottom or top of the stairs.

The client said there was a terrible noise problem from this room (occupied
by teenager) & wanted me to either lift the floorboards & install insulation
or fit an insulated sub floor.

I turned the job down because IMO neither would solve the noise problem & I
didn't want to be in a situation where I'd charged for the work and not
sorted the problem. My thoughts were that the large opening on the stair
well was allowing the noise transmission & insulating the floor wouldn't
achieve much.

It now occurs to me that the room is a fire trap? Only escape via a Velux.
Is that the case?


--
Dave
The Medway Handyman
www.medwayhandyman.co.uk
01634 717930
07850 597257

The Medway Handyman wrote:

I looked at a job last week, in a loft conversion. Proper stairs went up
from the landing, solid wall one side, handrail the other side.

The stairs emerged roughly in the middle of the conversion. The stairwell
was 'boxed in' on three sides by a waist high solid partition. No door at
the bottom or top of the stairs.

IIRC, that can be acceptable if there is only one room in the loft, and
the stairways themselves are protected (i.e. door to other habitable
rooms that open onto the same landing or hall are fire resisting)

There is quite bit on this in Approved doc B1:

http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/upl..._ADB1_2006.pdf

The client said there was a terrible noise problem from this room (occupied
by teenager) & wanted me to either lift the floorboards & install insulation
or fit an insulated sub floor.

That may deal with some types of noise, but by no means all.

I turned the job down because IMO neither would solve the noise problem & I
didn't want to be in a situation where I'd charged for the work and not
sorted the problem. My thoughts were that the large opening on the stair
well was allowing the noise transmission & insulating the floor wouldn't
achieve much.

Decoupling the floor would reduce foot fall noise and general creaking etc.

It now occurs to me that the room is a fire trap? Only escape via a Velux.
Is that the case?

Was it a means of escape velux? Close enough to the eves so as to permit
a ladder rescue?

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

On Sat, 11 Aug 2007 00:53:03 +0100, a particular chimpanzee, John Rumm
randomly hit the keyboard and
produced:

The Medway Handyman wrote:

I looked at a job last week, in a loft conversion. Proper stairs went up
from the landing, solid wall one side, handrail the other side.

The stairs emerged roughly in the middle of the conversion. The stairwell
was 'boxed in' on three sides by a waist high solid partition. No door at
the bottom or top of the stairs.

IIRC, that can be acceptable if there is only one room in the loft, and
the stairways themselves are protected (i.e. door to other habitable
rooms that open onto the same landing or hall are fire resisting)

It's not really. The stair itself needs to be separated by a full
height enclosure with a door at the top landing, or separated from the
floor below by an enclosure and door at the bottom.

Decoupling the floor would reduce foot fall noise and general creaking etc.

Yes, but the 2m² hole in the floor would probably overwhelm any such
effect.
--
Hugo Nebula
"If no-one on the internet wants a piece of this,
just how far from the pack have you strayed?"

Hugo Nebula wrote:

IIRC, that can be acceptable if there is only one room in the loft, and
the stairways themselves are protected (i.e. door to other habitable
rooms that open onto the same landing or hall are fire resisting)

It's not really. The stair itself needs to be separated by a full
height enclosure with a door at the top landing, or separated from the
floor below by an enclosure and door at the bottom.

Would not a hall/landing that has all rooms that open on to it protected
by fire doors not count as such an enclosure?

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

On Sat, 11 Aug 2007 13:57:09 +0100, a particular chimpanzee, John Rumm
randomly hit the keyboard and
produced:

Would not a hall/landing that has all rooms that open on to it protected
by fire doors not count as such an enclosure?

Is there a door between the loft conversion and the stairs to the
ground floor?
--
Hugo Nebula
"If no-one on the internet wants a piece of this,
just how far from the pack have you strayed?"

Hugo Nebula wrote:
On Sat, 11 Aug 2007 13:57:09 +0100, a particular chimpanzee, John Rumm
randomly hit the keyboard and
produced:

Would not a hall/landing that has all rooms that open on to it protected
by fire doors not count as such an enclosure?

Is there a door between the loft conversion and the stairs to the
ground floor?

In this hypothetical case, no. The front door opens onto a hall with
stairs to first one landing then the loft conversion. All doors opening
onto the same hall and landing being fire doors.

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

Hugo Nebula wrote:
On Sat, 11 Aug 2007 13:57:09 +0100, a particular chimpanzee, John Rumm
randomly hit the keyboard and
produced:

Would not a hall/landing that has all rooms that open on to it
protected by fire doors not count as such an enclosure?

Is there a door between the loft conversion and the stairs to the
ground floor?

Actually no.


--
Dave
The Medway Handyman
www.medwayhandyman.co.uk
01634 717930
07850 597257

John Rumm wrote:
Hugo Nebula wrote:
On Sat, 11 Aug 2007 13:57:09 +0100, a particular chimpanzee, John
Rumm randomly hit the keyboard and
produced:

Would not a hall/landing that has all rooms that open on to it
protected by fire doors not count as such an enclosure?

Is there a door between the loft conversion and the stairs to the
ground floor?

In this hypothetical case, no. The front door opens onto a hall with
stairs to first one landing then the loft conversion. All doors
opening onto the same hall and landing being fire doors.


In this actual case, none of the doors are fire doors, just el cheapo B&Q
jobbies.


--
Dave
The Medway Handyman
www.medwayhandyman.co.uk
01634 717930
07850 597257

In this actual case, none of the doors are fire doors, just el cheapo B&Q
jobbies.

Several times when I've talked through with friends (that are about to
move) about the house (or particularly flat) they're thinking of
buying, they seem to have a complete disregard for physical fire
protection - even when it's pointed out to them.

Even the ones that are over-protective of their children and very risk-
averse, don't seem to think fire doors and compartments as an
essential if they're living in close proximity to other flats.

Maybe the message about smoke alarms has been too loud - to the point
of many people trusting one bit of technology to the exclusion of
being concerned about any need for fire-resisting and fire-limiting
buildings (and the need to not over-stuff their own house or flat with
junk to the point of it being a ready-made bonfire).

coughed up some electrons that declared:


In this actual case, none of the doors are fire doors, just el cheapo B&Q
jobbies.

Several times when I've talked through with friends (that are about to
move) about the house (or particularly flat) they're thinking of
buying, they seem to have a complete disregard for physical fire
protection - even when it's pointed out to them.

Even the ones that are over-protective of their children and very risk-
averse, don't seem to think fire doors and compartments as an
essential if they're living in close proximity to other flats.

It's human nature. When I had my flat and was living as a bachelor, I found
the self closing hinges on *every* internal door (except cupboards and
bathroom) to be a right royal pain, so I took the setting pins out.
Previous owner had been in the habit of wedging most of the doors open.
However, I am exceptionally paranoid about turning stuff off and not
allowing wall warts or equipment to get buried under cushions or stacks of
paper, so I mitigated my own risk in different ways.

Rightly or wrongly that's what people do. I gave the pins in a little bag
to the next owner.

The best solution IMO is self closers held open with a mag catch linked to a
fire alarm system, but that's proably a bit expensive for most people in a
domestic setting.

Maybe the message about smoke alarms has been too loud - to the point
of many people trusting one bit of technology to the exclusion of
being concerned about any need for fire-resisting and fire-limiting
buildings (and the need to not over-stuff their own house or flat with
junk to the point of it being a ready-made bonfire).

Not so sure - I still see many houses with no or very poor fire alarm
arrangements.

Cheers

Tim

wrote in message
ups.com...

In this actual case, none of the doors are fire doors, just el cheapo B&Q
jobbies.

Several times when I've talked through with friends (that are about to
move) about the house (or particularly flat) they're thinking of
buying, they seem to have a complete disregard for physical fire
protection - even when it's pointed out to them.

Even the ones that are over-protective of their children and very risk-
averse, don't seem to think fire doors and compartments as an
essential if they're living in close proximity to other flats.

But sometimes the rules (IMHO) go too far.

In my flat all of the doors (except the bathrooms) have
closers, and all of the doors are stopped open in order
to stop the rooms getting stuffy.

And this isn't just me, the stops were in place when I
viewed the flat so were used by the previous occupant
as well.

If I owned this flat the closers would come off. The regs
may make them a requirement, but the reality is that
the average occupant finds them a pain and would
rather that they weren't there. As the doors are stopped
open all the time, they don't serve their purpose, so what's
the point of having them?

tim

tim..... wrote:

If I owned this flat the closers would come off. The regs
may make them a requirement, but the reality is that
the average occupant finds them a pain and would
rather that they weren't there. As the doors are stopped
open all the time, they don't serve their purpose, so what's
the point of having them?

Perhaps this is why regs now no longer require them?

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/