Again, macv's and the other's designs are prohibited from use under the International Residential Code if they access habitable spaces. I recently prosecuted a local builder/developer over just such an issue and won. The builder/developer came in with a set of plans for a 6 unit townhouse with a mezzanine level above the 2nd floor that was access by a "library ladder" from the 2nd floor atrium/foyer....Very similar to some of those shown here. The mezzanine was labeled on the plans as 'storage' and the design approved because this loft was not going to be used as habitable space. Once the units were built, and the Certificates to Occupy were issued, the builder/developer signed a contract with a local realtor to show the units. That's where the trouble for the builder/developer began. I was directed to the realtor's website where for her 'staging' she had arranged this mezzanine area as a habitable area, complete with sofas, living room furniture and day beds. These were permitted as 3 bedroom townhouses, yet the realtor's description of the units indicated they were 4 bedroom homes...the mezzanine clearly being listed as an additional sleeping space. The result: Our office revoked the certificates of occupancy and ordered the builder to either replace the 'library ladders' with stairs that met the code, or to stop advertising these units as 'bedrooms' with habitable mezzanines. The builder/developer objected and filed an appeal with the Appeals Board. The Appeals Board, once seeing the false advertising, concluded as well that the builder/developer had intended all along to use these levels as habitable space and provided false information to our code office. The Appeals Board ordered the builder/developer to do exactly as we had ordered: change the library ladders to code compliant stairs since it was obvious their intended use was as habitable space. The builder/developer did not stop there, however. He filed suit, but unfortunately for him, lost again. The judge agreeing that these lofts were indeed intended as habitable space, and that the builder/developer must comply with our order or face daily fines until he did. The result: The builder/developer had to not only pay for all the costs associated with his challenges, in the end he was forced to install code compliant spiral stairs in order to have a certificate to occupy each townhouse reinstated. About $50,000 more. Moral of the story: The CODES prevail when it comes to designs acceptable for compliance, not the whims or imagination of designers, builders, developers, realtors or anyone else. macv's mis-use of the Code is apparant even as he tries to support his erroneous positions by stating from it. While it is true that 'alternative designs' are allowed, it is NOT TRUE that these alternate designs can violate the prescriptive intent of the Code. macv's link from the IRC section R104.11 rightly states: 'The provisions of this code are not intended to prevent the installation of any material or to prohibit any design or method of construction not specifically prescribed by this code....." But macv is forgetting entirely that R104.11 also mandates: "... provided that any such alternative has been approved. An alternative material, design or method of construction shall be approved where the building official finds that the proposed design is satisfactory and complies with the intent of the provisions of this code, and that the material, method and work offered is, for the purpose intended, at least equivalent of that of the prescribed code." NONE of the designs illustrated by macv and others provide methods "at least equivalent" to that of the prescriptive code requirement for residential stairs. None. They are designs that are LESS RESTRICTIVE and therefore unfit to be "approved". -------------- I don't have time to point out macv's flawed use of the other code sections he cites....none of which even pertain at to residential habitable spaces. That said, I work in an office that employs 32 code inspectors all of whom are former trade professionals. The collective experience of all these men and women in the building and code inspection professions is many hundreds of years. I showed macv's photos to my colleagues today, where they were met utter amazamement that someone could be so wrong in his insistance he was right. Few were surprised, however, because we see it all the time from some designers. Their conclusion: macv's and the other unsafe 'ladder' designs ARE prohibited from being used to access habitable spaces in residential buildings. So don't be mislead and don't take my word for it. Talk to your local code professionals. After all, it is THEY who issue your permits and THEY who approve your designs. And by the way, The Appeals Board that rejected the builder/developer's "ladder"? Made up entirely of local engineers and local architects.... Not sure why some are dead set on misleading the readers of this thread, but I'll give them cresit where credit is due: they are quite good at it.

Thanks everyone! Funny you mentioned mannequins! We'd thought about that but decided it would be too creepy! The rolling library ladder is a very cool idea, but our bed has to go on that wall. We'd thought about putting in an antique iron spiral staircase and then replace the shutters with a contemporary iron railing, but then we'd still have the useless space. It would be fun to put a really great piece of art up there. I wonder if suspending about 4 contemporary framed black and white photographs from the ceiling might "block" the view to the back shelves and then we could use the space for storage? Hmmm. Pinterest, here I come...

Hi! Thanks for all the advice. I went to help her set things up and to look at it in order to decide how to provide privacy. I decided to get ceiling tracks (found some at BBB for $9.99 on sale from $39!). I got 4 tracks of 48" each to cover the 12' span. I'm going to attach to the ceiling and I made 4 blackout curtain panels (bought ready-made panels from Target and added blackout fabric to them) to hang on the tracks. The opening at the staircase will not be covered so light will come in there,but for privacy that will be okay. She'll decide later if she wants something added there. So here's is my final question: The ceiling is 9' tall and the half-wall is 4'. So that leaves a 5' space to fill with the curtains. I am all done making them except to hem to the final length. Should I have them extend beyond the top of the half-wall, so maybe hem them to 65" or so? I was thinking that if the curtains are a little bit longer than the opening, they would stay closed better if there are slight breezes from AC or the nearby ceiling fan. Would about 5" extra inches be sufficient, or should it be more, like 10 or 12"? So far: Ikea bed with drawers, over-bed storage rack form BBB, a soft-sided Ikea wardrobe, Ikea shelf with plastic bins (instead of a wooden dresser), shelf from BBB. Adding soon, a small laptop desk and a swivel chair from Ikea with will fit at te foot of the bed where there are about 4' left. We realize nothing matches but we were going for function and had to choose from what was available.

I like artistsharovna's second photo as a solution for this, but that still might be a bit much to execute. Here's an idea (I don't think I can find a photo of it) Get some hanging racks on wheels like they have in clothing stores and attach fabric hangings like beautiful old horse blankets, quilts or an oriental rug. You can push them together, overlap them or push them out of the way when you need to.