Footpaths - Need for ramp.

cwboy

Hi,

Just doing footpaths on my new build at the moment and am wondering if I need to put in a ramp access to the house? Would a timber ramp to be used when needed be acceptable?

Thanks

No6

cwboy wrote: »

Hi,

Just doing footpaths on my new build at the moment and am wondering if I need to put in a ramp access to the house? Would a timber ramp to be used when needed be acceptable?

Thanks

In a nutshell no, and it had to be at the front door too!!!

Leo Demidov

Many's the ramp that goes to the back door and manys the house signed off with no ramp at all.

My planning drawings detailed a ramp to the utility room, blocklayer made the ope too small. Ramp was omitted and house was signed off on condition that i put in a wooden ramp to the conservatory if we ever sell up.

RKQ

A permanent ramp is required.
It can be very handy for pushchairs etc.
Its also very useful when moving white furniture into your new home - cookers, fridge, boilers, cylinders, stoves etc - all heavy objects, that are much easier to move on a trolley, along a path and up a ramp.

sydthebeat

personally, i hate the term ramp...

by right a ramp should not be applied... the regs called for "sloped access".
Ramps are a crude way of meeting these regulations.

The ground levels should be sloped in all directions to the main access door, thus there really should be no ramp at all. Ramps themselves are problematic.

gman2k

wexfjord wrote: »

Many's the ramp that goes to the back door and manys the house signed off with no ramp at all.

My planning drawings detailed a ramp to the utility room, blocklayer made the ope too small. Ramp was omitted and house was signed off on condition that i put in a wooden ramp to the conservatory if we ever sell up.

Manys the house that is built that does not comply with the law of the land. That does not make it an acceptable situation.
In your situation, the person who 'signed off' is ignorant of Part M of the building regulations, and in fact your house does not comply - full stop. Even if you put in the 'ramp' to the conservatory it will not comply.

A ramp (please call it level access) is to enable easy life term occupancy of the house by the resident of the house and to enable those with special needs have easy access to the living areas of your house when visiting.
The need for the current Part M partly arose in this country from the experience of Dublin Councils, who were spending huge sums every year on 'upgrading' tenants homes to provide level access and downstairs toilets and bedrooms to cater for elderly persons who were unable to easily use the upstairs of their homes, and even get in and out their own front doors!

Think of it like this - a person using a wheelchair, or walking aid, or even crutches are disabled by the environment that is presented to them. Place steps where you can have level access and you disable them - not that they are disabled.

It is as easy to build your house properly (i.e. meet or exceed Part M requirements) than it is to not build it properly.
Please, please, please do not have the humiliating situation where you have to carry a relative or visitor into your home simply because you were too lazy/ short sighted/ ignorant of the law (delete as appropriate) to build your house properly in the first place.

Sorry for the rant, but I'm fed up of the a la carte attitude in this country to many aspects to the building regulations.
I would take bets that this is a can of worms soon to be opened up on a grand scale in this country when banks/ NAMA/ etc take possession of many thousands of properties to then find out they were 'signed off' in a self regulatory fashion that conveniently ignored many aspects of the building regulations. I forecast professional indemnities will not cover these eventualities due to the scale of the problem.

homewardbound11

Hi RKQ,

I had this conversation with my enforcer in the council and the front of the house is not always necessary or possible. I will need to go over my noted conversations but from what I remember, provided the entry was the main access to the dwelling and it was withing a certain XX metres of access from a vehicle and that the entry had a door bell and was wheel chair accessable then I was allowed to have a wheel chair accessable entry to another entry other than the fornt door.

I believe this was our conversation but will have to have a chat with kevin again. Have you seen these allowed exceptions on you travel in mayo.

I have not built the footh paths yet but as my entry from a vehicale is at the side of the building and will be the main entry on a regular basis I plan to place the wheel chair access to this area.

Any comments appreciated?.

RKQ wrote: »

A permanent ramp is required.
It can be very handy for pushchairs etc.
Its also very useful when moving white furniture into your new home - cookers, fridge, boilers, cylinders, stoves etc - all heavy objects, that are much easier to move on a trolley, along a path and up a ramp.

Leo Demidov

gman2k wrote: »

Manys the house that is built that does not comply with the law of the land. That does not make it an acceptable situation.
In your situation, the person who 'signed off' is ignorant of Part M of the building regulations, and in fact your house does not comply - full stop. Even if you put in the 'ramp' to the conservatory it will not comply.

Just to clarify for you, there are houses all over the country that have their M-ramp to the rear or side entrance, all by design and with the knowledge of planning authorities, does this make it right? No. Did I advocate this? No.


I was merely stating the reality of my own situation. The "ignorant" professional who signed off on this did so because he missed it during construction, not because he was ignorant of the regulations. The conservatory being chosen as a fall back was because it has a low level threshold that the front door does not.

I agree that this and all regs are there for very good reasons, the fact of the matter is that they were disregarded, misinterpreted etc. No one here is disputing any of this so get down off your high horse. I would be very surprised if any more than 20% of dwellings built during the "boom" are in full or reasonable compliance. The developers are mainly to blame, but as you say, attitudes permitted this to happen. Management, professionals and trades all played a part, will we learn for the future? NO.

Mellor

I hate ramp too.
This is fine if retro fitted. But it should never be done in a new build. It's a poor designer who draws a ramp any where on a set of plans. It's a poor builder who can't get level access with out a ramp.

As for front door verses back door.
it doesn't have to be the front. It has to be the entrance.
i'll admit that some houses wil be grey in this area, such as side doors etc. But some are clearly level on the rear only.


This is another example of people doing the minimum. The regs say 1 level access so only 1 goes in. Clearly its far better and comfortable to have every door level (taking bikes, white goods in and out, simply not tripping). But people, as always, resist rules to the point of idiocy.