Confused re: first floor windows lower than 800m

ladybirdbaby1

Hi there,

We are sale agreed on a house that was built in 2005-completed in 2007.

We had a surveyor who poInted out that all the first floor windows (bedrooms) are lower than 800mm from the floor, and that t windows themselves open out like a door. It’s an old farmhouse style, but a new build. Because the ridge height of the roof is just above the window, he told us the only thing to do is to build dormer windows.

The owner of the house who built this says he was told it complies as long as you have a guard across it (current there isn’t, and we don’t like the look of). He got full planning and we saw it, and he is getting us a cert of building compliance.

The question is this... if we replaced the windows with sash windows made with toughened glass, the opening above 80cm from the floor and the opening 45cm And over 75cm wide, will this comply??? Will be get a full building regulation cert?

We have asked so many people now, But still unclear on the answer!

Thank you

sydthebeat

we'd really need a photo of the current situation.

mickdw

ladybirdbaby1 wrote: »

Hi there,

We are sale agreed on a house that was built in 2005-completed in 2007.

We had a surveyor who poInted out that all the first floor windows (bedrooms) are lower than 800mm from the floor, and that t windows themselves open out like a door. It’s an old farmhouse style, but a new build. Because the ridge height of the roof is just above the window, he told us the only thing to do is to build dormer windows.

The owner of the house who built this says he was told it complies as long as you have a guard across it (current there isn’t, and we don’t like the look of). He got full planning and we saw it, and he is getting us a cert of building compliance.

The question is this... if we replaced the windows with sash windows made with toughened glass, the opening above 80cm from the floor and the opening 45cm And over 75cm wide, will this comply??? Will be get a full building regulation cert?

We have asked so many people now, But still unclear on the answer!

Thank you

As the window opens out, fitting a guard internally at between 800 and 1100 should be an option to achieve compliance assuming that height is the only issue.

Going for the replacement window option, what height would the bottom of the opening be?

sydthebeat

mickdw wrote: »

As the window opens out, fitting a guard internally at between 800 and 1100 should be an option to achieve compliance assuming that height is the only issue.

Going for the replacement window option, what height would the bottom of the opening be?

what id be worried about mick, from the description given, is that the majority of the window would end up behind the guarding. the "old style farmhouse" description has me thinking its a storey and a half type

what are the following dimensions please?

1. height of cill of window from floor level
2. height of head of window above floor level
3. width of window

Casati

ladybirdbaby1 wrote: »

Hi there,

We are sale agreed on a house that was built in 2005-completed in 2007.

We had a surveyor who poInted out that all the first floor windows (bedrooms) are lower than 800mm from the floor, and that t windows themselves open out like a door. It’s an old farmhouse style, but a new build. Because the ridge height of the roof is just above the window, he told us the only thing to do is to build dormer windows.

The owner of the house who built this says he was told it complies as long as you have a guard across it (current there isn’t, and we don’t like the look of). He got full planning and we saw it, and he is getting us a cert of building compliance.

The question is this... if we replaced the windows with sash windows made with toughened glass, the opening above 80cm from the floor and the opening 45cm And over 75cm wide, will this comply??? Will be get a full building regulation cert?

We have asked so many people now, But still unclear on the answer!

Thank you

You have to get planning to install dormers and a retro install is likely to be costly. Id ask the vendor to install the guards - indeed can't see how he could get a cert of compliance without them

mickdw

sydthebeat wrote: »

what id be worried about mick, from the description given, is that the majority of the window would end up behind the guarding. the "old style farmhouse" description has me thinking its a storey and a half type

what are the following dimensions please?

1. height of cill of window from floor level
2. height of head of window above floor level
3. width of window

Good point given the mention of a dormer construction possibly being needed however they appear to state that they can install a window with opening above 800 with an opening of 450 above that so it should be possible to meet current regs at least.

JimmyMW

ladybirdbaby1 wrote: »

Hi there,

We are sale agreed on a house that was built in 2005-completed in 2007.

We had a surveyor who poInted out that all the first floor windows (bedrooms) are lower than 800mm from the floor, and that t windows themselves open out like a door. It’s an old farmhouse style, but a new build. Because the ridge height of the roof is just above the window, he told us the only thing to do is to build dormer windows.

The owner of the house who built this says he was told it complies as long as you have a guard across it (current there isn’t, and we don’t like the look of). He got full planning and we saw it, and he is getting us a cert of building compliance.

The question is this... if we replaced the windows with sash windows made with toughened glass, the opening above 80cm from the floor and the opening 45cm And over 75cm wide, will this comply??? Will be get a full building regulation cert?

We have asked so many people now, But still unclear on the answer!

Thank you

Anything below 850mm needs safety glass, ie toughened or laminated, as it on the first floor this glass will need to also contain a person in the event of a breakage so a laminate is required. Also note the window sizes remaining to allow for escape from a fire, in both the barrier instance and modified instance, I suspect from the reading of the post you will not be able to make these windows comply easily. A few sketches of what exists and what your proposing would allow us to determine compliance or not

ladybirdbaby1

Thank you all for your replies!

Please see below some photos of current situation and our suggested fix with a sash type window ( with toughened glass if it’s acceptable.)

Current measurement are approximately 30cm from floor to window sill, window opening is 82 cm by 105 cm.



Sorry for any confusion!! Thanks for all your help

sydthebeat wrote: »

we'd really need a photo of the current situation.

ladybirdbaby1

Didn’t attach the first time!

See photo below

sydthebeat wrote: »

we'd really need a photo of the current situation.

ladybirdbaby1

Final photo of outside the house .

ladybirdbaby1 wrote: »

Didn’t attach the first time!

See photo below

sydthebeat

ladybirdbaby1 wrote: »

Final photo of outside the house .

is it only that room where the issue is?

JimmyMW

3 things,

1. Laminate glass required below 800mm in this instance not toughened
2. The existing with barrier will comply with park K in terms of guarding, but not with part b in terms of fire escape, therefore i cannot see them being able to obtain a cert of compliance for same
3. Your proposed window will not comply with part b in terms of fire escape, see below extract

1.5.6 Windows may provide an alternative means
of escape or may be used for rescue purposes in
dwelling houses of limited height. As an alternative, a
door which gives direct access to a balcony or roof,
which is suitable for rescue by ladder or for escape
may be used. Where provision is made in this subsection for windows for these purposes (see
paragraphs 1.5.2, 1.5.3, 1.5.7.6 and 1.5.8.2), such
windows should comply with the following:
(a) The window should have an openable section
which can provide an unobstructed clear open
area of at least 0.33 m2 with a minimum width
and height of 450 mm (the route through the
window may be at an angle rather than straight
through). The opening section should be capable
of remaining in the position which provides this
minimum clear open area.
(b) The bottom of the window opening should be
not more than 1100 mm and not less than 800
mm (600 mm in the case of a rooflight) above the
floor, immediately inside or beneath the window
or rooflight. As an exception to the general
guidance in TGD K (Stairways, Ladders, Ramps
and Guards) that guarding be provided for any
window, the cill of which is less than 800 mm in
height above floor level, guarding should not be
provided to a rooflight opening provided in
compliance with this paragraph.
(c) In the case of a dormer window or rooflight, the
distance from the eaves to the bottom of the
opening section of the rooflight, or, where the
window is vertical, the vertical plane of the
window, should not exceed 1.7 m measured
along the slope of the roof.

ladybirdbaby1

No there are a total or 7 windows

sydthebeat wrote: »

is it only that room where the issue is?

sydthebeat

JimmyMW wrote: »

3 things,

1. Laminate glass required below 800mm in this instance not toughened
2. The existing with barrier will comply with park K in terms of guarding, but not with part b in terms of fire escape, therefore i cannot see them being able to obtain a cert of compliance for same
3. Your proposed window will not comply with part b in terms of fire escape, see below extract

1.5.6 Windows may provide an alternative means
of escape or may be used for rescue purposes in
dwelling houses of limited height. As an alternative, a
door which gives direct access to a balcony or roof,
which is suitable for rescue by ladder or for escape
may be used. Where provision is made in this subsection for windows for these purposes (see
paragraphs 1.5.2, 1.5.3, 1.5.7.6 and 1.5.8.2), such
windows should comply with the following:
(a) The window should have an openable section
which can provide an unobstructed clear open
area of at least 0.33 m2 with a minimum width
and height of 450 mm (the route through the
window may be at an angle rather than straight
through). The opening section should be capable
of remaining in the position which provides this
minimum clear open area.
(b) The bottom of the window opening should be
not more than 1100 mm and not less than 800
mm (600 mm in the case of a rooflight) above the
floor, immediately inside or beneath the window
or rooflight. As an exception to the general
guidance in TGD K (Stairways, Ladders, Ramps
and Guards) that guarding be provided for any
window, the cill of which is less than 800 mm in
height above floor level, guarding should not be
provided to a rooflight opening provided in
compliance with this paragraph.
(c) In the case of a dormer window or rooflight, the
distance from the eaves to the bottom of the
opening section of the rooflight, or, where the
window is vertical, the vertical plane of the
window, should not exceed 1.7 m measured
along the slope of the roof.

what aspect of the proposed solution window doesnt comply?

personally OP, if that the only room effected... id break out a compliant window on the gable wall, and change those windows to fixed opes.

not only do those current windows not comply with fire escape regs, but they are a serious falling hazard for children in my opinion.

no way anyone signed those off originally, and id worry what other aspects of the build were not signed off on.

edit: only seeing the above response now.
remedial works to create dormers in windows such as this is a HUGE job and will look terrible due to how close the windows are to each other.
you may actually be better off building up a gable to consume both windows

can you show pics of the other effected windows?

ladybirdbaby1

sydthebeat wrote: »

what aspect of the proposed solution window doesnt comply?

personally OP, if that the only room effected... id break out a compliant window on the gable wall, and change those windows to fixed opes.

not only do those current windows not comply with fire escape regs, but they are a serious falling hazard for children in my opinion.

no way anyone signed those off originally, an did worry what other aspects of the build were not signed off on.

edit: only seeing the above response now.
remedial works to create dormers in windows such as this is a HUGE job and will look terrible due to how close the windows are to each other.
you may actually be better off building up a gable to consume both windows

can you show pics of the other effected windows?

Yes, we did think all of these things... upsetting really! But it’s good hear our thoughts from another person... thank you

Gumbo

Remember, all you need is one window for fire escape.
Is there any chance one of them can be brought up to standard?

sydthebeat

Gumbo wrote: »

Remember, all you need is one window for fire escape.
Is there any chance one of them can be brought up to standard?

good point !

TheBoyConor

I like the idea of breaking out a compliant escape window on the gable, and then re-working the existing windows with toughened or laminated glass, and fixing or locking opening mechanism so that the windows cannot be opened any more.

Gumbo

TheBoyConor wrote: »

I like the idea of breaking out a compliant escape window on the gable, and then re-working the existing windows with toughened or laminated glass, and fixing or locking opening mechanism so that the windows cannot be opened any more.

That’s what I’d do but I’d possible allow the windows to open with the nominal restrictions to 100mm. Just for ventilation etc

mickdw

I dont see alot wrong with the sash window proposal assuming minimim 450 clear in all directions when open and it exceeds 0.33 sqm.
Personally not a fan of that current reg but would appear to comply.

JimmyMW

sydthebeat wrote: »

what aspect of the proposed solution window doesnt comply?

personally OP, if that the only room effected... id break out a compliant window on the gable wall, and change those windows to fixed opes.

not only do those current windows not comply with fire escape regs, but they are a serious falling hazard for children in my opinion.

no way anyone signed those off originally, and id worry what other aspects of the build were not signed off on.

edit: only seeing the above response now.
remedial works to create dormers in windows such as this is a HUGE job and will look terrible due to how close the windows are to each other.
you may actually be better off building up a gable to consume both windows

can you show pics of the other effected windows?

0.33m2 min free ope not achieved in OP suggested design

JimmyMW

mickdw wrote: »

I dont see alot wrong with the sash window proposal assuming minimim 450 clear in all directions when open and it exceeds 0.33 sqm.
Personally not a fan of that current reg but would appear to comply.

does not come near 0.33m2 when frame is accounted for

JimmyMW

TheBoyConor wrote: »

I like the idea of breaking out a compliant escape window on the gable, and then re-working the existing windows with toughened or laminated glass, and fixing or locking opening mechanism so that the windows cannot be opened any more.

good idea, however again toughened glass does not provide containment, it must be a laminated glass

sydthebeat

JimmyMW wrote: »

0.33m2 min free ope not achieved in OP suggested design

480mm x 850mm = 0.408 m2 (which is in excess of 0.33m2)

mickdw

JimmyMW wrote: »

does not come near 0.33m2 when frame is accounted for

I dont think we have enough detail to clearly say that. Window manufacturer would be needed to offer clarity there.
450 x 750 is possibly achievable

JimmyMW

sydthebeat wrote: »

480mm x 850mm = 0.408 m2 (which is in excess of 0.33m2)

Clear uninterpreted ope, 480mm x 850mm appears to be frame sizes, most frames will be 50-60mm wide, therefore optimistically your looking at 430x750mm, then you must take into account the amount of overlap the open sash has with the fixed frame, will most likely be 30-40mm ie sliding sash will not open flush to fixed sash, so based on what is there firstly the 450mm is not achieved and you most likely looking at 400x750mm max resulting in 0.3m2 max

JimmyMW

mickdw wrote: »

I dont think we have enough detail to clearly say that. Window manufacturer would be needed to offer clarity there.
450 x 750 is possibly achievable

Agreed more detail required

sydthebeat

JimmyMW wrote: »

Clear uninterpreted ope, 480mm x 850mm appears to be frame sizes, most frames will be 50-60mm wide, therefore optimistically your looking at 430x750mm, then you must take into account the amount of overlap the open sash has with the fixed frame, will most likely be 30-40mm ie sliding sash will not open flush to fixed sash, so based on what is there firstly the 450mm is not achieved and you most likely looking at 400x750mm max resulting in 0.3m2 max

thats an awful lots of assumptions

the OP has the ability to ensure the window, when opened fully stops at a minimum of 800mm above floor level. That gives a 550 possible opening, or if you want to include a 50mm frame, a 500mm opening.

the OP only then needs 660mm of clear opening between jambs, which should be easily achieved with a 850mm ope.

ladybirdbaby1

Thank you all for your input 😊

I take from this ( correct me if I’m wrong), that if we can achieve a sash window in laminated glass with an opening that exceeds 0.33m2 and the stationary window up to a height of 800mm, that this should be compliant with building regs and we would probably be able to get a building reg compliant cert?

I guess this is an uncommon mistake, given the fact that it’s a new build. Still can’t understand why anyone would do this when they have the opportunity to do it all right the first time 🀔!

ladybirdbaby1

Thank you all for your input 😊

I take from this ( correct me if I’m wrong), that if we can achieve a sash window in laminated glass with an opening that exceeds 0.33m2 and the stationary window up to a height of 800mm, that this should be compliant with building regs and we would probably be able to get a building reg compliant cert?

I guess this is an uncommon mistake, given the fact that it’s a new build. Still can’t understand why anyone would do this when they have the

Metric Tensor

ladybirdbaby1 wrote: »

I guess this is an uncommon mistake, given the fact that it’s a new build. Still can’t understand why anyone would do this when they have the opportunity to do it all right the first time ��!

It's an uncommon mistake when a professional is inspecting the build during construction.


This type of mistake is very common when there's a lack of professional involvement because people who "build it themselves" very rarely know all the applicable regulations. There's a good point made above that this could be indicative of a lack of professional involvement and therefore might point to other non-compliances that are not as easy to "fix." (Some of which may be impossible to see with the naked eye.)