Remember Gaurdrail and Seating on Deck Discussion

[Mule]

It looks like the 2009 IRC Commentary put our old question about the height of gaurdrails above seating on decks? It looks like the commentary has addressed the issue when "fixed" seating is provided.

 

[cboboggs]

Here is the actual code section.

"R312.2 Height. Required guards at open-sided walking surfaces, including stairs, porches, balconies or landings, shall be not less than 36 inches (914 mm) high measured vertically above the adjacent walking surface, adjacent fixed seating or the line connecting the leading edges of the treads."

 

[FredK]

Just so everyone's on the same page it's "fixed seating".

Figure it'll take some clown about 5 minutes to unscrew the unit from the deck.

 

[Yankee]

Just so everyone's on the same page it's "fixed seating". Figure it'll take some clown about 5 minutes to unscrew the unit from the deck.

Or screw the unit ONTO the deck after final . . .

 

[GHRoberts]

I can see no advantage to providing fixed seating anymore but ...

The figure seems to show the seating attached to the guard. So let's say the seating is fastened to the deck instead. How close to the guard does the seating have to be to require the higher guard?

It is always easy to design items that the code does not directly address. Best to avoid situations that cause the AHJ to holler.

 

[tbz]

Ah,

I see the 2009 commentary is out.

GH,

The distance from the seat surface to the guard is not defined in the 09, the 12 was defined and then at final action hearings seemed to get revised again and removed all messed up in the 2012.

Anyway, the simple basis is if the guard is mounted at the edge,

and the fixed seating is within 36" of the guard, one will/could argue then the height needs to be 36 plus height of the fixed seating.

In the proposals for 2012 the wording was added that take a 36" long radius IRC 42" IBC from the edge of the fixed seating within 22" of the guard and raise the guard to match the radius for the minimum.

For 09 one could use the same radius but for the IRC, it would be 36" not 22" from guard.

Tom

 

[High Desert]

Don't like the code change. What's the difference between fixed and movable furniture...and I know, we can't regulate furniture. I am only saying the same hazard exists whether fixed or not. They should have just banned fixed seating when the deck required guardrails.

 

[Yankee]

Don't like the code change. What's the difference between fixed and movable furniture...and I know, we can't regulate furniture. I am only saying the same hazard exists whether fixed or not. They should have just banned fixed seating when the deck required guardrails.

This will effectively ban fixed seating alongside of a guard, while still offering a "choice".

 

[righter101]

So, can I have "fixed seating" in a bedroom and measure from that for my 44" to my required egress window??

 

[High Desert]

Here is the actual code section."R312.2 Height. Required guards at open-sided walking surfaces, including stairs, porches, balconies or landings, shall be not less than 36 inches (914 mm) high measured vertically above the adjacent walking surface, adjacent fixed seating or the line connecting the leading edges of the treads."

Another problem is the term adjacent fixed seating. Athough the figure show shows it attached to the guard, that's not what the code says. Adjacent does not mean attached. It could be in the middle of the deck and could be interpreted as being "adjacent."

cboboggs: I see where you're going but the code actually says "not more than 44 inches above the floor."

 

[Yankee]

cboboggs: I see where you're going but the code actually says "not more than 44 inches above the floor."

although a platform the size of a landing would be a walking surface, , , floor, , , I have approved that in the past with existing situations

 

[righter101]

I didn't mean to shift the discussion to egress. Maybe I should post under a new thread for my question.

 

[High Desert]

Yankee, I think I have done that also.

 

[tbz]

H.D.

The IBC always had the limit on fixed seating, a modification trend has been happening in enough where by the adopting agencies have been modifying the IRC to include fixed seating that during the CTC's review of climbable guards reviewed documentation showing seating surfaces are a point were injuries were related and after lengthy debate added the same requirements to the IRC code, that were in the IBC.

Seeing a possible conflict with the wording both the IBC-MOE & the IRC committees (passed the proposals in 2009) and requested during the committee hearings that the CTC define a distance and better measurement placements and submit future proposals to clean it up.

That wording was added in to the code in the 2012 IBC & IRC during the committee hearings, later on at the Dallas finally action hearings, the IBC portion was passed and the IRC section was modified by another public proposal that failed committee, but passed final action, in other words changing the wording again. But that does not come about in till 2012 is adopted.

As for a measuring point, though the 2009 code(s) don't say fixed seating within 36" of the guard, it does say within 22 inches in the 2012 code, therefore a code official IMO can reasonable apply the requirement when the fixed seating is within 36" of the guard in the IRC & within 42" in the IBC and not require the restriction past that point, pointing to a published model code not yet adopted, that specifically was written to clarify the question in concern and uses a reduced trigger point.

The reason I suggest the distances I do is the arc length matches the required guard height and weather it is on top of the fixed seating or away from the fixed seating the distance is still in place.

I will post the 2012 IBC measuring diagrams later on.

Tom

 

[tbz]

Also,

For the record there are AHJ's out there like LA, that require the minimum guard height of 42" for windows also and thus do fail projects that install fixed seating in front of windows with a drop of more than 30" from the inside floor level to the outside ground level.

 

[Paul Sweet]

Next thing you know they'll decide that since fixed seats have guardrails they must be walking surfaces, so they have to be at least 36" wide and have code complying stairs with handrails, plus a ramp if it's a Type A unit.

Why don't thay just get it over with by requiring non-climbable chain-link fencing turned in at the top like highway overpasses all the way around decks?

 

[High Desert]

Razor wire? Or "concertina wire" to jar.

 

[High Desert]

Tom, I understand your reasoning, but try to convince an ARCO of that and you'll get "the code says fixed seating so I don't care if it's 10 feet away, it's fixed seating and has to comply."

 

[David Henderson]

CRC R312.2 required guards at open-sided walking surfaces, including stairs, porches, balconies or landings,shall not less than 42" high measured vertically above the adjacent walking surface, adjacent fixed seating or the line connecting the leading edges of the treads. There is the standard exception for the stairs 34 to38 inches