• Welcome to the new and improved Building Code Forum. We appreciate you being here and hope that you are getting the information that you need concerning all codes of the building trades. This is a free forum to the public due to the generosity of the Sawhorses, Corporate Supporters and Supporters who have upgraded their accounts. If you would like to have improved access to the forum please upgrade to Sawhorse by first logging in then clicking here: Upgrades

Big openable window not required to have guards

S

sunyaer

Registered User
Joined
Apr 21, 2022
Messages
338
Location
Toronto

BCAB #1802 - Re: Required Guards

A summary of Decision 1802 of the BC Building Code Appeal Board.
www2.gov.bc.ca

Project Description

The project is a house (single family dwelling unit) with no secondary suite. The subject window is located on the second storey of the building and is an operable upsliding or ‘single hung’ window with an opening of 870 mm by 1140 mm. The sill of the window is 290 mm above the interior finished floor and the interior finished floor is 3 220 mm above the exterior adjacent ground level.
———————————————————
Regardless of building code, is this operable window with such a big opening safe if you have small children?
 
Short answer: it's not. Guards for window openings have been required for some time in Part 3 buildings and as of the 2020 national code, will be required in Part 9 as well. The big issue is going to be how this affects windows in bedrooms. They have to provide a certain size opening for people to get out in an emergency, so the sill height is going to need to meet the same height above the floor as guards.
 
tmurray said:
Short answer: it's not. ..
Click to expand...
Please see the attached ruling in my OP:

“window with an opening of 870 mm by 1140 mm. The sill of the window is 290 mm above the interior finished floor and the interior finished floor is 3 220 mm above the exterior adjacent ground level.”

No guards needed for this window?
 
Not until the jurisdiction adopts the 2020 National Building Code, or in the case of provinces with their own codes, the language requiring it.
 
tmurray said:
so the sill height is going to need to meet the same height above the floor as guards.
Click to expand...

California Code
Fall protection is required if the sill height is less than 24”. Guards are required to be 42”.

What is the Canadian height of a guard? In inches please.
 
ICE said:
California Code
Fall protection is required if the sill height is less than 24”. Guards are required to be 42”.

What is the Canadian height of a guard? In inches please.
Click to expand...

Normally, for dwelling units, 36" if the difference in elevation is not more than 6'. Otherwise, 42".

However, in this case, it is only triggered if the difference in elevation is more than 6', so guard height in this specific instance would always be 42".

Code Sections:

4) Except as provided in Sentence (5), openable windows in buildings of residential occupancy shall be protected by
a) a guard, or
b) a mechanism that can only be released with the use of tools or special knowledge to control the free swinging or sliding operation of the openable part of the window so as to limit any clear unobstructed opening to not more than 100 mm measured either vertically or horizontally.
(See Note A-9.8.8.1.(4).)
5) Windows need not be protected in accordance with Sentence (4), where the bottom edge of the openable portion of the window is located
a) more than 900 mm above the finished floor, or
b) less than 1 800 mm above the floor or ground on the other side of the
window.
 
No surprise here, but I am confused. Can you post the actual code section?


California Residential Code:
R312.2.1 Window sills. In dwelling units, where the top of the sill of an operable window opening is located less than 24 inches (610 mm) above the finished floor and greater than 72 inches (1829 mm) above the finished grade or other surface below on the exterior of the building, the operable window shall comply with one of the following:
  1. Operable window openings will not allow a 4-inch-diameter (102 mm) sphere to pass through where the openings are in their largest opened position.
  2. Operable windows are provided with window fall prevention devices that comply with ASTM F2090.
  3. Operable windows are provided with window opening control devices that comply with Section R312.2.2.
 
ICE said:
No surprise here, but I am confused. Can you post the actual code section?
Click to expand...
NBC 9.8.8.1 (translated to non-metric as required, many bits removed)

4) Except as provided in Sentence (5), openable windows in buildings of residential occupancy shall be protected by
a) a guard, or
b) a mechanism capable of controlling the free swinging or sliding of the openable part of the window so as to limit any clear unobstructed opening to not more than 100 mm [4"] measured either vertically or horizontally where the other dimension is greater than 380 mm. [15"]
(See Note A-9.8.8.1.(4).)
5) Windows need not be protected in accordance with Sentence (4), where
a) the window serves a dwelling unit that is not located above another suite,
b) the window serves a house with a secondary suite,
c) the only opening greater than 100 mm by 380 mm [4"x15"] is a horizontal opening at
the top of the window,
d) the window sill is located more than 450 mm [17 3/4"]above the finished floor on
one side of the window ....
 
JPohling said:
Can we get a separate thread for just Canada?
Click to expand...
Haha, I mean this was posted in the Canada section of the Forum. So it stands to reason that all threads within the section would be Canada specific.

Issue is those that look at the What's New section. Those that troll from the What's New miss what section the thread is in and respond based upon their own knowledge, unaware that this OP put the post into a different section (i.e. Canada).
 
classicT said:
Haha, I mean this was posted in the Canada section of the Forum. So it stands to reason that all threads within the section would be Canada specific.

Issue is those that look at the What's New section. Those that troll from the What's New miss what section the thread is in and respond based upon their own knowledge, unaware that this OP put the post into a different section (i.e. Canada).
Click to expand...
That is hilarious! I had no idea that there was a specific Canada section. It all just gets lumped together like you said. So many times have i started to prepare a response and then realized.........arghhhhhhh. pretty much always go to "whats new".
 
JPohling said:
That is hilarious! I had no idea that there was a specific Canada section. It all just gets lumped together like you said. So many times have i started to prepare a response and then realized.........arghhhhhhh. pretty much always go to "whats new".
Click to expand...

I think there are six of us.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top