• Welcome to The Building Code Forum

    Your premier resource for building code knowledge.

    This forum remains free to the public thanks to the generous support of our Sawhorse Members and Corporate Sponsors. Their contributions help keep this community thriving and accessible.

    Want enhanced access to expert discussions and exclusive features? Learn more about the benefits here.

    Ready to upgrade? Log in and upgrade now.

Guard or no guard?

darcar

darcar

Silver Member
Joined
Nov 12, 2009
Messages
129
A contractor has decided to install a walking platform in the attic space of a 3 story apartment building to provide access to a clocktower at the corner of the building. The platform travels about 30 feet with turns and goes through wood truuses spaced 24" O.C. The only thing stopping someone from falling through to the apartment below is trusses and sheetrock on the ceiling below.

2009 IBC section 1013 requires guards along open-sided walking surfaces, including mezzanines, equipment platforms...etc. located more than 30" to the floor or grade below... the bottom of the trusses wouldnt be considered floor or grade would it?

Opening limitations allow a 21" opening if access is for elec, mech, plmbg equipment.
 
The structural requirements for a floor mean that the ceiling system would not qualify as a floor. Tell him that the guards are required.

If you don't OSHA will!

(no question about who YOU'RE cheering for this weekend, is there?) :D
 
Would a guard be required for every catwalk provided for access to mechanical equiipment in an attic? I don't think so.

I say no guard required.

GPE
 
For access to the HVAC equipment I'd agree with you. The condition is access from a point to the clock tower. That becomes a "different" path of travel. It's no longer an interstitial space with only mechanical equipment in it.
 
I am not familiar with additional guards being provided on the required HVAC equipment access walkways in attics that this path most looks like.

Open sided elevated areas for equipment (including clock) maintenance would only need a guard that prevents the passage of 21 inch sphere if it were a free standing platform.

The 24 inch on center trusses themselves provide a guard with a 22-1/2 inch spacing even if no ceiling etc installed.

Generally misstepping and putting a foot through the drywall ceiling from the attic is a damaged ceiling issue not a fall to the floor below issue. I suspect many of us on this board have busted a ceiling or few that wayover the years.
 
$ $ $ $

I also agree with GPE(S)!...I do not particularly like it, but the minimum,

as it is written [ the "letter" ] in the code is all that is required.....They

could certainly go above the minimum and install some type of guards,

...guard railing, etc.

$ $ $ $
 
Not to change the question, but on the subject of guards, the Green Building Adviser has a feature article on a LEED Platinum office remodel in Portland Maine, apparently Green Building doesn't entail observing building codes.

portland
View attachment 374

View attachment 374

/monthly_2011_02/portland1.jpg.54e23c04d9936baa413639825a9be8a7.jpg
 
Just to stir things up a bit: those risers look pretty shallow - if they happen to be 6" risers, with a total rise to the landing of only 30" - would a guard rail be required? I see a handrail on one side, and this looks residential to me.
 
look at the additional 3 white risers at the top of the set painted black. . . woah . . so, , you come down those, trip a little, and weeeeee right off the landing!
 
Yankee said:
look at the additional 3 white risers at the top of the set painted black. . . woah . . so, , you come down those, trip a little, and weeeeee right off the landing!
Click to expand...
I agree - bad design. However, is it code compliant? If that landing is 30" above the floor - is a guard required?
 
I think Darren's right!

Conarb - Is it possible that the ICC-700 gives a trade-off allowing for elimination of superfluous safety elements (given they're such a waste of limited resources), if enough natural light is provided through the skylight and the south-facing window to provide adequate illumination of the stair system? Besides, the handrail material may have to be trucked in over 10 miles from the jobsite!! Let's focus on what's important here!!
 
Even if it is less than 30", at least a guardrail is required for non residential occupancies:

1009.10 Handrails.

Stairways shall have handrails on each side and shall comply with Section 1012. Where glass is used to provide the handrail, the handrail shall also comply with Section 2407.

Exceptions:

1. Aisle stairs complying with Section 1025 provided with a center handrail need not have additional handrails.

2. Stairways within dwelling units, spiral stairways and aisle stairs serving seating only on one side are permitted to have a handrail on one side only.

3. Decks, patios and walkways that have a single change in elevation where the landing depth on each side of the change of elevation is greater than what is required for a landing do not require handrails.

4. In Group R-3 occupancies, a change in elevation consisting of a single riser at an entrance or egress door does not require handrails.

5. Changes in room elevations of only one riser within dwelling units and sleeping units in Group R-2 and R-3 occupancies do not require handrails.
 
I would say no guards required darcar, but if I was making the determination I would ask how often they need to access the clock tower - if its only say once a year (changing lights etc) I would say leave it alone, I know I have had to move through some scary attic areas in the past to do work. But if it is on a more regular basis (say monthly) I would encourage the owner to add a more permanent walkway.
 
A little late but 2 comments.

1. Attic space with ceiling below is not open sided IMO, though I would not like it, I believe the guards are not required per 1013.

2. Conrab, I have to agree with you, totally non-compliant and the website that promotes this as great stuff just makes it hard for companies like mine when we tell clients, you can't do that, it is not code compliant and the Architect says we will find someone to make it and then the building department passes it.

What needs to happen more is when some gets hurt, the insurance company should pass the bill on to the designer and have them pay for the medical bills. You would see more designers follow the code.
 
Regarding The Original Post issue:

Yes Guards are required "Guards shall be located along open-sided walking surfaces, including mezzanines, equipment platforms, ..."

Regarding the Guard Issue raised by Conarb

I do believe guards were provided at final signoff and then removed. Legal, no, they have given the insurance company a way out, not to pay any claims.

Regarding the accessibility Issue raised by Conarb

The Primary function area/Public area, of the office, needs to be accessible. At a minimum the conference room and restrooms serving the office, must be accessible. The drafting/ production area needs to be adaptible.

Note there are no pictures of the office, what was designed may not be what will be built
 
Last edited by a moderator:
TBZ:

The ironic thing here is that it's an architect's own mixed use building, he not only ignores building code, but fire code, and ADA. I guess they don't have the wheelchair brigades rolling up to architect's offices in Maine, kind of pains me since I was born there in Portland, damn good thing my parents got me out in the late 30s.
 
Assuming a clock is in the tower as a non-essential component; an architectural feature only access by service personnel, the floor here is for convenience instead of walking over the trusses.

Now if it where a required passageway to an appliance in that same corner as the clock tower would it still require guards?

It appears the walking surfaces that have guards are constructed with a minimum 40 psf live load or 300 lbs concentrated load.

Additionally having engineered trusses require an engineer to design the trusses to withstand the guard concentrated loads per 1607 and 2303.4 (2006 IBC).

However, interstitial codes are beyond me!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top