Door at top or bottom of stairs

[Fuzzie]

Also if the door is at the bottom of the stairs it probably needs to be higher than normal for safe clearance stepping off the bottom step. The house in which we had with such a door, it was extra tall!

[yvan]

Hello Aaron,

I lived temporarily in a two-story house over a Tasmanian winter. We ended up hanging a heavy curtain at the top and the bottom of the stairs to prevent the loss of heat on the ground floor. It was pretty much jerry-rigged but worked very well.

Cheers,
Yvan

[Mobyturns]

The answer to your question is contained within the National Construction Code - Volume 2 section 3.9.1.5 Landings. This is free to download and view if you want.

Short answer is …..

750mm long landing at the top of the stairs between the doorway and risers (if more than 3 risers).

There doesn’t seem to be a requirement for the bottom of the stairs.

I'm a bit rusty but there are also definitions in the BCA and Aust Standard/s AS1657 - note that there are some differences between external / internal between "habitable rooms"/ and internal to "storage areas / non-habitable rooms" staircases / landings and door at top / bottom of stairs.

This link has a pretty good precis - NCC REGULATIONS - Oz Stair Pty Ltd

[Sir Stinkalot]

I'm a bit rusty but there are also definitions in the BCA and Aust Standard/s AS1657 - note that there are some differences between external / internal between "habitable rooms"/ and internal to "storage areas / non-habitable rooms" staircases / landings and door at top / bottom of stairs.

True. The NCC is the renamed BCA. I tried to keep the answer as simple as possible to the question raised. Based off the original description it appeared to be an internal staircase connecting two habitable spaces. There are different requirements for access to non-habitable spaces.

The link provided a good rundown - but the problem is always the reliability of a third party website if regulations change. The update NCC is the best reference - even if it is somewhat vague and open to interpretation at times.

[Mobyturns]

The update NCC is the best reference - even if it is somewhat vague and open to interpretation at times.

Like all regulations.

I agree with your comments and advice.

Someone will always seek out a loop hole for their advantage, and those who draft such regulations can never accommodate all possibilities. I've seen some strange interpretations of the habitable / non-habitable rulings and also some overly absurd (and expensive) imposts for infrequently used facilities, and of course some shocking and appalling "solutions."

However slip, trip, fall injuries are rising in frequency and are more common in those aged over 65, and women. Even though stair injuries account for approx 6% of fall type injuries the severity of the injuries (hip & lower limb) also increases with age / gender. 70% of hospital admissions for fall type injuries in buildings are persons over 65. The home accounts for the majority of slip, trip, fall injuries approx 60%. There were 1815 fatalities (2001-2005) with 71% being persons over 65. Estimates of the annual cost of slip, trip, fall injuries in Australia exceeds $1.3 billion. (Australian Building Codes Board funded research by Monash University ARC.)

So stair (& balustrade) design in the home and residential care facilities has attracted a fair bit of attention. There is a strong focus on ensuring all facilities "meet code" due to our aging population; bringing "up to code" older installations that have never complied with the minimum BCA/NCC requirements; and to accommodate the change in the physical stature of our population (taller etc).

Money spent of getting stair & balustrade installations "right" is money well spent especially if you have family or visitors who meet the "ageing demographic."