Toying with a side extension for the house. It would run the entire length of the house if monies allow. I would obviously need to allow space for side access. Somebody told me to leave a minimum of 1 meter, does this sound right or is it too much ie could I get away with less?

btw I'm just talking about in terms of practical needs for access not planning/building regs etc


Thanks

 

What colour is your house???????

 

how wide is a door ? thats the min IMO

 

600mm would be ok.

 

na id go 601mm just to be safe

 

no 602mm so it's equal at both sides

 

Wheelie bin or wheel barrow size as a minimum.

 

what if he has a box 603mm wide ? i think we need to rethink this !

 

a rethink for sure as ive just measured a box i have at 604mm

 

I know some fridge freezers are 700mm wide

 

You can go up to your boundary if you have access at the other side to get to the back garden.

STeve

 

OK then, if a new side access to a private residential property then it needs to be wide enough to fit a std wheelchair and from memory it is something like 68-70cm min and no more than 1:12 slope.

This is from memory - when researching this for private commercial with regard to an event.

 

900mm min. I would go for 1m. Practically speaking, just building the new extension you need to allow enough room to get the scaffolding in.

 

Hmmm, so anywhere from 600mm to 1 metre?

Once the extension was done there would be no further scope for building at the back (as far as I can imagine) so I'm trying to think what I might need to get through (apart from the obvious like wheelie bins etc)


Neanderthal has a good point that scaffolding maybe needed in the future (ie for roof repairs, painting etc), would this require a 1 metre opening?

 

900mm is only for main access, for example public rd/path to your main door. Paul is correct with 1:12 gradient, although all that is required is that there is a level access outside the main entrance door of 900x1200. Then you can have steps or a slope(no more than 1:12) to meet the public path/highway. You do not need access to the back of your house. That is what is called land locked. All private paths on new builds are 600mm wide. It is up to you wether you make it wider or narrower. Personally I would always want access to the rear and 600mm is wide enough for a wheelie bin

 

I am just about to build an extension and the front corner of it will be close to the boundary line, could not really think of any reason to keep a side alleyway? I would rather have a bigger garage which I will use everyday instead of side access that I may use once a year.

I will still have access straight through the garage and will complete the back garden at the same time.

 

I like this one if it is to be left alone.

 

I think I know what you mean but I take it there is nothing behind the garage, so you can go into the garage at the front and then walk out the back of it into the garden?
My 'proposed' extension will run all the way back to the rear boundary of the house, so in other words there will be rooms behind the (rebuilt) garage. This means the garage won't open out onto the garden and therefore side access is essential

 

Thanks

 

Mate, you really are scraping the bottom of the barrel with that one!

http://www.google.co.uk/imgres?imgur...ed=0CCAQ9QEwAg

 

im pretty sure part m doesn't apply to private dwellings so there prob isn't a minimum. however, keeping a reasonable distance of about 1m will serve you well in the long run.

 

Yes, as far as I know there are no rules/regs regarding this. My question was from a practical point of view in what size people think was needed to allow anything needed into the back of the property with ease.

I have 1m at the moment (between house and preexisting garage, which will be rebuilt/knocked down) but was wondering whether i could get away with cutting the new access down a bit (to make extension bigger).

It seems though that 1 metre is about right

 

you can get away with it but personaly, after doing structural drawings for several housing estates , i would want 1m. leaves a nice gap to get stuff through, plus if you want to store a bin down it you'll still be able to sqeeze past

 

Thanks, you've obviously got experience/expertise in such matters so 1 metre it is

Have a great weekend and thanks again for the advice

 

no probs, same to you

 

This may sound like yet another stupid question but can you build a wall at an angle??

Basically my plot gets wider towards the back and as mentioned I'd like to extend on the side all the way from the front to the very back of the house. If I'm going to pay all that money I'd like to get the absolute maximum space possible.
Towards the back I'd get a good 10 ft internal width space (after taking into account wall thickness), at the very front I think it maybe only 8.5ft which is obviously quite tight.

To make the most of the space is it possible to build thhe extension such that the new external wall follows the widening plot? So the side access would always remain a fixed 1 metre (and hence I'm 1 metre from neighbour) but the extension widens progressively as you go back.

Can this be done, and would it look really weird inside or out to have a wall that isn't parallel to the existing wall of the house?

Thanks

 

No. All walls have to be at 90 degrees to one another. I thought everyone knew that?

 

Really? So its physically impossible to have any building that isn't a square or rectangle?

http://www.globosapiens.net/jackning...ago-23069.html

http://www.pbase.com/image/78972050

Here's a rather famous one

http://www.fotosearch.com/GLW006/gwz10055/


You seem to live in a one dimensional world or need to get down to spec savers mate

 

I think you'll find all of the above are optical illusions. All those walls in the links are in actual fact perfectly straight and perpendicular to each other.

It is you sir who needs glasses. Try looking again with one eye covered.

 

pmsl, all walls at 90 degrees