Altering Staircase

[Ernesto Di Michele]

Hi
Does anyone know if altering an existing winder on a staircase to create a change in direction is acceptable. Trying to avoid a new staircase with proper landing as we already have restricted headroom and the increase incline required would make things even worse.
Photos of rough setting out attached..

 

[tony1851]

Looks OK to me - a reasonable solution to a common problem.
It would improve safety if you had a long grab rail on the left-hand corner, partly to hold on to and partly to stop you missing your footing and going down two risers at that corner when descending.
Your inspector might have different views, but there is no prescriptive requirement, other than that stairs shall be 'safe'. In a domestic setting, safety can be achieved by familiarity with the stairs.
If there is to be a new door, set it in about 300 from the edge of the top riser.

 

[Ernesto Di Michele]

Grateful for your reply Tony and tips. With regards to the door my understanding was that the landing had to be at least the width off the staircase. In my case this is 800mm but it would be great to get away with 300mm. Where could I get clarification on this?

 

[tony1851]

Where could I get clarification on this?

Google Approved Document K - this deals with stairs.
The general rule is that a landing should have an unobstructive depth equal to the width of the flight. However, a change in level of less than 600 is not controlled by Building Regs. If you could convince the inspector that the second winder up (ie the one you have added a little triangle to) is a landing on the basis that this is the point where you have the option of going right or left, then the rise to your new floor will be < 600mm and the requirement for a deeper landing would not apply.
If he won't buy that, then the Approved Document clearly states that familiarity is an important determinant of safety. If a landing takes too big a bite out of your new room, it rather defeats the object.
Suggest hinging the door on the right when viewed from inside the room, as this will tend to keep the user away from the drop on the right.
Subject to some minor mods. suggested, I would think your stairs would be safer than those awful alternating tread stairs which are allowed for lofts.

 

[catlad]

Could you not do away with the V shape at the top where you decide to go left or right and make it a sort of landing?
Maybe just cut a piece of ply first and put it over the top to see how it looks.

 

[Ernesto Di Michele]

Thank you both for your comments.
I'll send some pics to LABC and hopefully I'll get a positive response.
Ive tried your suggestion catalo but it takes up too much of the winder. Maybe a slightly different shape insert would work better. Thanks for your input.

 

[Ernesto Di Michele]

Tony I've tried to find the provision in K1 where changes in level under 600mm do not apply to the regs. It only appears in older documents however and not the latest 2010 document.... Will still mention it though. Thanks again.

 

[tokn]

Looks okay, I would as @catlad says bring it forward as much as possible, doesn't have to be the full depth ofc but think you're giving yourself and moreover any guest a big chance of missing that tread on the way down.

 

[tony1851]

Tony I've tried to find the provision in K1 where changes in level under 600mm do not apply to the regs. It only appears in older documents however and not the latest 2010 document.... Will still mention it though. Thanks again.

As you say, the 600 difference concession was not included in the latest revision, but the latest revision also states that there was no substantive change in the rules; just because it's not now in the AD doesn't mean it is not allowed.
Are you using a private inspector or LABC? Private Approved Inspectors are usually more realistic and acommodating than some local authority bods.

 

[domdee]

Could you not do away with the V shape at the top where you decide to go left or right and make it a sort of landing?
Maybe just cut a piece of ply first and put it over the top to see how it looks.

I would kind of do this too. square the triangle and diamond/kite shaped steps off to make bigger a sub landing at the left right juntion, even if that meant trimming off the bottom pointed edge of the diamond/kite shaped step. This will then make the step below is more substantial.