Loft convertion - Open Plan Living - Building regs

[chewymix]

Hi

What i am about to say no doubt will get people ranting at me about lack of respect for fire etc etc however what i would ask for is some facts and how i process those and deal with the concequences is my lookout....

We have had out loft converted and its curently being finished to current building regs. We have linked fire alarms installed on each floor as part of this fit out. Currently the downstairs is somewhat open plan meaning that the bottom of the stairs is open to the dining room which is in turn open to the living room. As part of the build there has been the requirement from the building inspector to create a stud wall bewteen the stairs and the dining room to close off the staircase. In the clients opinion, ie mine, this will spoil what is currently a nice flow to the ground floor. We had in earlier discussions with said building inspector asked about adding additional linked detectors to the other rooms on the ground floor to negate the need for this additional wall, he considered this, as we know of others that have been given building regs certs with this change, but in the end he refused. So be it we'll create the stud wall and get the cert.

Now the bit where i'll get shouted at. Once i have the cert, lets say the wall comes down again, and talking to our building inspector he tells me that he knows this happens all the time. If we did do that would it in any way effect the insurance on the house against a claim for fire? If we were to remove the wall we would install additional linked detectors anyhow so i would appreciate anyones real world experience of such proposals.

I do not take fire lightly which is why no desicion has been made but if it were to render insurance null and void, despite having a valid building regs cert, then it might make us reconsider. It just seems odd that some building inspectors think one way and others another and we are just trying to do the right thing with our living space.

thanks

(dons hard hat)

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

Firstly the Building Regulations are actually guidance and not cast in stone which is why there is differing opinions as to how compliance can be achieved especially where conversions are concerned and sometimes certain regulations can be bent. Whilst this is unfortunate there’s not a great deal you can do about it. You can appeal against Building Regs decisions though if you really want to http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/buildingregulations/determinationsandappeals/moreinfo and of course you could try to get a more senior inspector’s opinion from your local authority although they may well side with the original inspector if they are even prepared to get involved and this is may get your Inspectors back up a bit. But if you feel strongly enough then those are your options. Did you offer a sprinkler solution as some inspectors will accommodate those?

Yes of course your building insurance will be affected as you are proposing changes to a layout that currently complies with Building Regulations that would mean it no longer complied with the regs creating a greater risk to life and the rest of the dwelling. That’s why you haven’t rung your insurance company up to find out so you don’t give them the heads up! It doesn’t matter what other measures you take, be it additional alarms or sprinklers or whatever, on paper it will be illegal and as you’re no doubt aware insurance companies will go all out to avoid a payout (and rightly so IMHO in such a situation as this).

 

[chewymix]

i dont dispute anything that you have said but its currently not 'illegal' and open plan and by adding another floor i fail to see why this does make the ground floor 'illegal' but i take on board the fact that sometimes regulations dont make sense to all.

Inspector A says that if we do what we propose its illegal and inspector B says no its OK you are fine. If only i could find inspector B ! We went for private building control rather than council so i doubt there is anyone more senior, we'd have to pay another firm for maybe the same answer, although maybe not.

 

[big-all]

you can overcome the difficulty by introducing a sprinkler system
http://www.domesticsprinklers.co.uk/

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

Once you add an additional floor above a first floor ie extend into the attic different regulations apply hence why it is OK when you only have a first floor but not OK when you have a first and second floor. The Building Regs Part B is pretty clear on loft conversions tbh, have you had a look at it?

The point is that when you get your certificate the conversion can be said to comply with Building Regulations, if you remove something that was required in order for it to comply it will become an illegal conversion.

As mentioned the Building Regulations are not cast in stone, the regs do make sense but in situations such as this it can come down to the individual inspector. Your inspector is not really being harsh or unfair in your situation, moreover if there are houses the same as yours whereby they have been approved with no protected means of escape the inspectors have been generous in those cases. As mentioned you can always appeal, maybe see if he’ll consider sprinklers or consult a fire specialist maybe?

 

[DevilDamo]

Firstly the Building Regulations are actually guidance and not cast in stone

Say whaaat!?! The Building Regulations are... the regulations. The Approved Documents are there as guidance documents in ways of achieving compliance with the Building Regulations.

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

Yes DD the building regs are not cast in stone and can be compromised depending on circumstances. For example in a lofty or extension why you can sometimes get away with less than 2m headroom on stairs or less than 400mm clear in front of a step etc, many inspectors are prepared to compromise on the regulations if it is reasonable and justifiable.

 

[mikric]

Good posts by FMT
How would you feel if fire broke out downstairs and you and yours found your only way out was blocked by an ever increasing fire. Try blindfolding yourself and crawling on your hands and knees from the loft to your front door and timing it, then add the 30 seconds needed before you have figured out there is a fire add the panic factor, will you all get out
Fire brigade are not scene as quickly as people imagine, that's if you have remembered to call them in your panic, and you phones handy.
If someone dies and you are found negligent by your actions things are gonna get messy/ hence why most inspectors will not waiver from requirements or any guidance documents.

 

[chewymix]

so this all boils down to protected escape huh? I guess we must remember to close these new doors every night then!

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

We don't make the regulations, they're there to protect people from themselves! This thread is a perfect example.

 

[DevilDamo]

If you are able to justify an open plan type arrangement with the assistance of a fire risk assessment, then there's no reason why the BCO will not accept it. Yes, it will cost you more money to have the report produced but if you're so keen on this open plan arrangement and getting grief from the BCO, then this may be the way to go.

 

[chappers]

Yes DD the building regs are not cast in stone and can be compromised depending on circumstances. For example in a lofty or extension why you can sometimes get away with less than 2m headroom on stairs or less than 400mm clear in front of a step etc, many inspectors are prepared to compromise on the regulations if it is reasonable and justifiable.

No the regs are set in stone and form part of The Buildings Act the reg for the quantities you quote is;

"stairs ladders and ramps shall be so designed, constructed and installed as to be safe for people moving between different levels in or about the building"

The quantities you mention are an accepted way as part of achieving this, some parts of the approved documents will be the only way of conforming whereas other methodologies are more flexible.

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

No the regs are set in stone

On paper yes, in reality no. My experience clearly differs to yours then chappers!