Removing understairs studwall timber frame property house

[francis0990]

Hello everyone,

 

I have recently purchased a house and one of the first things I wish to do is remove the toilet situated in the hall under the stairs  along with the stud wall to allow for a snug seating area. As this is a timber frame house I am a little unsure of what can and can't be done, I have been in contact with local planning and have been advised to get a builder or survey carried out. As I am trying to keep the cost down so I thought I would check in here  i will be doing whatever work I can myself  but need to insure everything is correct as there seems to be a lot of red tape. Any advice on how to go about this would be greatly appreciated. I have attached a few photos to help give an understanding of what I wish to remove.

 

Double marked green lines is what definitely needs removed to make it work. Single green line also would be good to have that removed also but not essential. Two red lines aren't level with wall which isn't ideal but can work around that if not removable also 

 

Anything above door frame can stay but again would like it removed to open the area up fully 

 

Thanks 

[francis0990]

[francis0990]

[francis0990]

[markc]

As this is timber frame and the verticals are doubled there is a very good chance those members are load bearing. You really need to speak to the timber frame company to check. What about removing the door and frame and making the verticals a feature?

what seems like a small job could well be quite complex and expensive in this case

[francis0990]

Unfortunately it will only work if the doubles are removed as access we'll be needed in these locations to access the seating as there would  be a table in situ. 

[twice round the block]

A snug seating area ( a place where family members dump piles of junk, coats, bags, shoes etc ) doesn't add as much value as a downstairs cloakroom,  unless your going to put one elsewhere on the ground floor. 

Timber frames are complex... make sure your house insurance is up-to-date. 

[francis0990]

I need the space more for seating and dining - need not a want trying to open it up as much as possible downstairs is small in comparison in to rest of house and there's no need for a toliet or storage  cloak room.

[Redbeard]

Hi @francis0990,

 

I don't think there's any substitute for structural engineering advice, whether from an independent SE or from the timber frame co.'s SE. As @markc states the doubling suggests load-bearing, and it is not worth taking risks.

[francis0990]

Ok thank you I guess I will have to make call to engineer then on Monday.

 

 

[ProDave]

In your very first picture, post a picture of the detail where the left pair of timber uprights meets the ceiling, cunningly just out of shot in that first picture.

 

Be prepared to take a little of the ceiling plasterboard down in the WC to see exactly how these timbers interface.

 

Is the one marked in pink/ purple tape on the left of that first picture a single or double pair?

[francis0990]

I will cut the roof plaster shortly and take a few more photos also. The only ones that are double are the onesqt either side off the door rest are single thanks

[ProDave]

I await the photos.

 

[Iceverge]

This looks fraught with troubles. 

 

Loosing a downstairs W/C could make your house very hard to sell in future not to mind unusable if anyone becomes unable to use the stairs. 

 

 

Can you post plans of the house. Maybe the collective wisdom could come up with a clever solution that didn't involve so much upset. 

[francis0990]

It is a three storey house so I don't see anyone with disability etc buying it in future which was another reason why I decided to look at doing this. Unfortunately don't have plans handy it is a semi three rooms on each floor all relatively same shape and size with good size bathroom on 2nd and third floor. V Small porch at front leads direct to living room straight through into hall where the tollet and stairs are then straight through again into kitchen. 

[francis0990]

[ProDave]

 

 

Can you do 2 things please.

 

Where those 3 joists together are (the head of the stairs) can you get in with a small camera or phone camera and look into the ceiling void so see what they join to please?

 

and take a bit more of the ceiling down right to the very left of the room please.

 

I don't believe that wall is supporting the 3 joists at the head of the stairs, is is simply not adequate for that. And I don't think the 2 studs together at the left are doing much.

 

I am forming the opinion the landing and head of the stairs is supported by a more substantial joist in the ceiling void and looking in an earlier picture that appears to be supported by a post at the turn of the stairs.

 

If that can be confirmed I think it will show this is not load bearing.  But bear in mind this is the opinion of a bloke on the internet and not to be relied upon.

[francis0990]

Thanks for your input been very helpful.  Im leaning towards it not being load bearing also which is good I don't want to put further large holes in plasterboard at the moment so I have the lend of an inspection camera on Tuesday which will let me see a bit more.  

 

I will no doubt be required to get a survey im not sure if there is away around that? Happy to get it done now as there shouldn't be issue with proceeding. After that who else do I need to contact    I am just slightly unsure on everyone have to engage with for carrying this out

 

 

Many thanks 

 

[Mr Punter]

It may be that the timber frame design just uses 2 studs either side of doorways even if non loadbearing.

 

I think the newel post could be helping support the landing.

 

If you take this wall out and something does start moving or sagging it should be possible to retrieve the situation with an acrow.  I have had to do this in the past and we had a SE look at it before we started.

[francis0990]

So I have. Had another look at this tonight and I made an error with one one the earlier photos. The 3 joists together now marked with long green line I previously marked red as blocks. So I'm now beginning to think it is a structural support. *Big sigh* anyone correct me on this if not? If that is the case I assume there's no way around it 

[francis0990]

I believe this is what the setup is