• 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.

Rooftop Access and Fall Protection at Small Apt. Bldg.

E

ETThompson

SAWHORSE
Joined
May 19, 2017
Messages
190
Location
Columbus, Ohio
I have a small 12-unit apartment building. We have rooftop package mechanical units distributed on 2 different roofs. On the larger one, the units are more than 10'-0" from the edge. But on the small one, they are less than 10'. We had not provided guardrails, but instead had planned anchors for tying off.

But we'd also planned to get access from a roof amenity deck which is one level down, using temporary ladders. The level down is less than 16'. The code says permanent ladders are needed if you're 16' from grade, but also would only seem to apply if the ladder you're climbing is from grade. Permanent ladders here would be pretty nasty, we'd need two on the only walls of our tiny roof deck. But to put roof access hatches would mean they'd be in people's apartments, which is not ideal either. Are we required to have permanent ladders?

So then the second question is, permanent or no, can we use the tie-offs to satisfy the building code requirement? You'd be coming up the ladder, and then tying off to get over the equipment. I don't see anything saying we can't do this...

Based on IBC and IMC 2015.

Thanks
 
My gut feeling is that you will need to have a permanent ladder.


I’m also not a fan of tie offs and neither are most of my clients. Any workers or maintenance staff will need to be trained to properly use them and they will also need to have a harness and lanyard to use the tie off. Lately I have been specifying collapsible guardrail systems like this one. The base it weighted and sits on top of the roof membrane, no penetrations thru the roof.


https://www.dakotasafety.com/collections/railing-products/products/collapsible-guard-rails?variant=11689755869299
 
Revisiting this.....Does everyone agree that the 16' is the above grade or is it OK to use a 15' ladder in the second floor stairwell to access the roof?

306.5 Equipment and appliances on roofs or elevated
structures. Where equipment requiring access or appliances
are located on an elevated structure or the roof of a building
such that personnel will have to climb higher than 16 feet
(4877 mm) above grade to access such equipment or appliances,
an interior or exterior means of access shall be provided.
Such access shall not require climbing over
obstructions greater than 30 inches (762 mm) in height or
walking on roofs having a slope greater than four units vertical
in 12 units horizontal (33-percent slope). Such access
shall not require the use of portable ladders. Where access
involves climbing over parapet walls, the height shall be measured
to the top of the parapet wall.
 
steveray said:
Revisiting this.....Does everyone agree that the 16' is the above grade or is it OK to use a 15' ladder in the second floor stairwell to access the roof?

306.5 Equipment and appliances on roofs or elevated
structures. Where equipment requiring access or appliances
are located on an elevated structure or the roof of a building
such that personnel will have to climb higher than 16 feet
(4877 mm) above grade to access such equipment or appliances,
an interior or exterior means of access shall be provided.
Such access shall not require climbing over
obstructions greater than 30 inches (762 mm) in height or
walking on roofs having a slope greater than four units vertical
in 12 units horizontal (33-percent slope). Such access
shall not require the use of portable ladders. Where access
involves climbing over parapet walls, the height shall be measured
to the top of the parapet wall.
Click to expand...
It's always been enforced as "from grade" for me.
 
So here is what I sent to the architect:

I’ll dig into this a bit more…As it is there to make the equipment more serviceable and promote worker safety, I believe the intent is to minimize hauling around large portable ladders. This becomes more problematic when they need to drag them in a building and up the stairs…My gut says they shouldn’t have to climb a 14ish’ flight of stairs carrying a 24ish’ ladder (never mind multiple flights that would be allowed if that were the intent)….And that is why they use the “above grade” terminology instead of something like “above the floor below” or “above the highest floor with stair access”…….Happy to entertain more discussion or if you can get clarification from the State….
 
steveray said:
Revisiting this.....Does everyone agree that the 16' is the above grade or is it OK to use a 15' ladder in the second floor stairwell to access the roof?

306.5 Equipment and appliances on roofs or elevated
structures. Where equipment requiring access or appliances
are located on an elevated structure or the roof of a building
such that personnel will have to climb higher than 16 feet
(4877 mm) above grade to access such equipment or appliances,
an interior or exterior means of access shall be provided.
Such access shall not require climbing over
obstructions greater than 30 inches (762 mm) in height or
walking on roofs having a slope greater than four units vertical
in 12 units horizontal (33-percent slope). Such access
shall not require the use of portable ladders. Where access
involves climbing over parapet walls, the height shall be measured
to the top of the parapet wall.
Click to expand...
I think you have NAILED the INTENT of the Code and the ladder from the easily accessed deck meets the INTENT
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top