Safety Glazing at Ramps

[Francis Vineyard]

Do you "infer" the requirements for ramps to be the same as stairs from the exception one (1) to 2406.4.6?

2406.4.6 & 2406.4.7 my reading requires safety glazing at landings between ramps and stairs but not at the ramp slope and landings at the top and bottom of ramps. If it were not for mentioning ramps in the first exception to 2406.4.6 I would not be questioning the intent.

2406.4.6 Glazing adjacent to stairs and ramps. Glazing where the bottom exposed edge of the glazing is less than 60 inches above the plane of the adjacent walking surface of stairways, landings between flights of stairs, and ramps shall be considered a hazardous location.

Exceptions:

1. The side of a stairway, landing or ramp that has a guard complying with the provisions of Sections 1013 and 1607.8, and the plane of the glass is greater than 18 inches from the railing.

2. Glazing 36 inches or more measured horizontally from the walking surface.


2406.4.7 Glazing adjacent to the bottom stair landing.

Glazing adjacent to the landing at the bottom of a stairway where the glazing is less than 36 inches above the landing and within 60 inches horizontally of the bottom tread shall be considered a hazardous location.

Exception: Glazing that is protected by a guard complying with Sections 1013 and 1607.8 where the plane of the glass is greater than 18 inches from the guard.

 

[fatboy]

I would infer it, wonder why it isn't spelled out like in 2406.4.6.

Leads you right up to it, but doesn't say it.

 

[RLGA]

There is an inconsistent use of the Oxford comma throughout the IBC when series of items are presented. Each element between a comma is independent, so the individual items that require safety glazing per Section 2406.4.6 include glass adjacent to the walking surface of the following:

• stairways,
• landings between flights of stairs, and
• ramps

The conjunction "and" after the second comma links "ramps" to the series and not just the previous item in the series. Why they only mentioned landings for stairs and not ramps is puzzling. To make it clearer, it should read: "...of the adjacent walking surface of stairways, landings, and ramps..."

Exception 1 to Section 2406.4.6 is an example of the confusion created when the Oxford comma is not used.

Is it the sides of a...

• stairway,
• landing or ramp?

Or, is it the sides of a...

• stairway,
• landing[,] or
• ramp?

I would say it is the latter using punctuation rules for a series when the Oxford comma is not used.

 

[Francis Vineyard]

Ron,

This explanation has made it clearer where a sentence uses the conjunction as follows;
"No change of occupancy shall occur when the current code requires a greater degree of accessibility, structural strength, fire protection, means of egress, ventilation or sanitation."

The conjunction "or" applies to each of the code provisions.

Thanks again!

 

[RLGA]

An example of why the Oxford comma, in my opinion, is necessary, especially in regard to legal language, such as that used in a contract or law (including the building code).

Here's an example why I think the Oxford comma is relevant: https://www.legalreader.com/missing-oxford-comma-cost-oakhurst-dairy-10m/