Re: Re: How Did Benson & Forsyth Do This?

Home Forums Ireland How Did Benson & Forsyth Do This? Re: Re: How Did Benson & Forsyth Do This?


@missarchi wrote:

here’s another one for you.. what hurts more assuming same going?

falling 3520mm down 16 stairs at 220mm
falling 3300mm down 20 stairs at 165mm
falling 3135mm down 19 stairs at 165mm

Henno is saying 16 stairs or 12 considering its an place of assembly?
I would take the 20 stairs anyday;)

I wondered what the intent of the limitation to 16 risers was.
Was it regard to the elderly or infirm, to allow them a resting point?
(If you have an adjacent lift is the requirement negated?)

To introduce a landing in longer stairs to break a fall?
(missarchi’s point is a good one in that regard).

or, as I suspect,
Is it mainly to provide a landing as resting point when two or three persons are carrying a wheelchair user down during an evacuation (when the lift can/may not be used)?

An evacuation chair is conspicuously located at the top of the rear, 19-riser flight in the gallery. Would the provision of this equipment demonstrate an alternative means of compliance?

The revised BS8300-2009 (Design of buildings and their approaches to meet the needs of disabled people) would seem very strange if it has increased this limit up to 20 risers. That whole document gets a slating from this reviewer: “Sleepwalking into Problems ?”

Just read that BS 8300-2009 does indeed permit max of 20 risers, describing how landings themselves can create problems for users such as the visually impaired.

Latest News