There was a very helpful thread on garden steps some months back: thanks to
everyone who chipped in.

One thing which didn't crop up then was this: I've looked at the online
regs but can't find this specific information.

I'm about to install sets of steps from my two patio doors and back door
down to the existing ground level; the drop is almost exactly 600mm. Is it
necessary to have handrails and vertical bannisters on both sides of each
set of steps, or is it sufficient to put them on one side only?

Thanks.

As so often happens (apologies) having posted the question I almost
immediately found the answer:

K1 1.34 (c): If the stairs are 1000mm or wider: provide a handrail on both
sides.

https://assets.publishing.service.go..._AD_K_2013.pdf

Well, are any of the people who use it suffering from sight problems? If so
then please paint whit or yellow on the edges and on the side with no rail,
and a light contrasting colour on the rail.
I've been to so many peoples houses when I still had partial sight and
tripped due to the lack of the 3D view of how the stairs run and the edges
if everything is the same colour.
Brian

--
----- --
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
"Bert Coules" wrote in message
o.uk...
There was a very helpful thread on garden steps some months back: thanks
to everyone who chipped in.

One thing which didn't crop up then was this: I've looked at the online
regs but can't find this specific information.

I'm about to install sets of steps from my two patio doors and back door
down to the existing ground level; the drop is almost exactly 600mm. Is
it necessary to have handrails and vertical bannisters on both sides of
each set of steps, or is it sufficient to put them on one side only?

Thanks.

Brian Gaff wrote:

Well, are any of the people who use it suffering from sight problems? If
so then please paint whit or yellow on the edges and on the side with no
rail, and a light contrasting colour on the rail.

That's planned, Brian. The main user will be me, and though my sight's OK I
have difficulties with balance: it's just as important for me clearly to see
the layout as it would be for the partially-sighted.

On 15/11/19 16:24, Bert Coules wrote:
Brian Gaff wrote:

Well, are any of the people who use it suffering from sight problems? If
so then please paint whit or yellow on the edges and on the side with no
rail, and a light contrasting colour on the rail.

That's planned, Brian. The main user will be me, and though my sight's OK I
have difficulties with balance: it's just as important for me clearly to see
the layout as it would be for the partially-sighted.

What will you be using for the handrails? Wood, metal, plastic, or a
combination?

--

Jeff

Jeff Layman wrote:

What will you be using for the handrails? Wood, metal, plastic, or a
combination?

Probably wood, which will make any colour choices easy to implement of
course.

In article
,
says...

As so often happens (apologies) having posted the question I almost
immediately found the answer:

K1 1.34 (c): If the stairs are 1000mm or wider: provide a handrail on both
sides.

https://assets.publishing.service.go..._AD_K_2013.pdf

You also need to take into account who will be using them.

For example, I walk with a stck in my right hand so, if I'm
forced to use stairs, it is important to have a handrail on
the left in BOTH directions, irrespective of the width of the
stairs.

--

Terry

Terry Casey posted
In article
k,
says...

As so often happens (apologies) having posted the question I almost
immediately found the answer:

K1 1.34 (c): If the stairs are 1000mm or wider: provide a handrail on both
sides.


https://assets.publishing.service.go...ds/system/uplo
ads/attachment_data/file/443181/BR_PDF_AD_K_2013.pdf

You also need to take into account who will be using them.

For example, I walk with a stck in my right hand so, if I'm
forced to use stairs, it is important to have a handrail on
the left in BOTH directions, irrespective of the width of the
stairs.

Of course the OP must also accommodate those who have no limbs and are
blind and deaf. So, rather than a stair, he must install a lift with a
fitted gurney, permanently staffed by a medically qualified attendant.

--
Evremonde

On Thursday, 28 November 2019 18:33:10 UTC, The Marquis Saint Evremonde wrote:

Of course the OP must also accommodate those who have no limbs and are
blind and deaf. So, rather than a stair, he must install a lift with a
fitted gurney, permanently staffed by a medically qualified attendant.

Nah, you can use a jcb bucket hinged onto the door cill.


NT

What if I have a visitor who suffers from Entamaphobia - the fear of doors?
Obviously I have to take great care to ensure that she or he won't be
distressed. I'd wall the doorway up, but the odds are I'd then be visited
by a touvlophobe, someone deathly afraid of bricks. Where does it end?

On 30/11/2019 14:20, Bert Coules wrote:
What if I have a visitor who suffers from Entamaphobia - the fear of
doors? Obviously I have to take great care to ensure that she or he
won't be distressed. I'd wall the doorway up, but the odds are I'd then
be visited by a touvlophobe, someone deathly afraid of bricks. Where
does it end?

It never started - you only have to make "reasonable provision".

For example if your block of 10 flats doesn't have step free access and
it would cost £60k to put in a ramp (£6k per flat), you don't have to do it.

However a £60k ramp on a block of flats serving 50 flats starts to
become more reasonable, and for a block of 100 flats, it becomes
unreasonable not to make the provision (£600 per flat).

John Kenyon wrote:

It never started - you only have to make "reasonable provision".

Ah, but who decides what is and what isn't reasonable? And reasonable for
whom?

On 20/12/2019 18:25, Bert Coules wrote:
John Kenyon wrote:

It never started - you only have to make "reasonable provision".

Ah, but who decides what is and what isn't reasonable? And reasonable
for whom?


In both cases, "The man on the Clapham Omnibus"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_man_on_the_Clapham_omnibus

On 23/12/2019 18:57, John Kenyon wrote:
On 20/12/2019 18:25, Bert Coules wrote:
John Kenyon wrote:

It never started - you only have to make "reasonable provision".

Ah, but who decides what is and what isn't reasonable? And reasonable
for whom?


In both cases, "The man on the Clapham Omnibus"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_man_on_the_Clapham_omnibus


I didn't see any reference to him in the Doug Paulley case (wheelchair
user wanting to use bus) where even the Supreme Court justices couldn't
agree on just what was and wasn't reasonable.

--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid