Hi Karen
yes an upper rail at 900-950 is essential as people use the handrail to
support them when climbing or descending stairs and 680 is too low for
safe use by adults.
people with visual and mobility impairments often descend facing
backwards and support themselves on the rails. Similarly older people
often need support for their forearm to provide additional support.
If you are fitting a new handrail consider making it oval cross section
type as this gives better support.
Regards
Dave Croft
Karen Tuff wrote:
>Dear all,
>I have recently visited a residental home, which is expanding its
>facilities to include the adjoining Victorian house. The additional part
>of the home is currently being adapted to house 11 residents with
>Dementia. I will be recommending an additional stair rail for use on the
>communal stairs, which allows access to the 1st floor bedrooms and
>bathrooms. The existing banister height is quite low, 680mm to the stair
>nosing. Is there a requirement for the additional rail and the existing
>banister rail to be at 900mm high? Or is it acceptable for the stair rails
>to remain at 680mm.
>
>
>Karen Tuff, Calido OT Services Ltd
>
>----------End of Message----------
>
>Run by SURFACE for more information on research, consultancy and the distance taught MSc. in Accessibility and Inclusive Design programme visit:
>
>http://www.inclusive-design.it
>
>Archives for the Accessibuilt discussion list are located at http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/accessibuilt.html
>
>
>
>
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 266.6.4 - Release Date: 07/03/2005
----------End of Message----------
Run by SURFACE for more information on research, consultancy and the distance taught MSc. in Accessibility and Inclusive Design programme visit:
http://www.inclusive-design.it
Archives for the Accessibuilt discussion list are located at http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/accessibuilt.html
|