Unsafe Climbable Condo Railings

[John Evans]

This 5 story condo building was constructed in 1984. Could not believe the balcony railings, how did the building pass local inspection? My clients purchasing a condo unit in this building have a young child. I explained how easy it would be for a child to climb these railings. Recommended contacting the association and city inspectors. Most importantly, these must be corrected before occupancy.

[Larry D. Kage]

Originally Posted by jevans

Most importantly, these must be corrected before occupancy.

Hiring security specialists to stand guard could also work...



Seriously, one could make a recommendation for enhanced safety and leave it to them.

[Bruce M. Graham, III]

I don't think I would use MUST as this was probable acceptable when built, but as a safety upgrade, the client is informed and you are covered.

[Mark Thorman]

The 1982 code required that no object 6 inches in daimeter shall be able to pass through guardrail. It looks like it meets that require so while repairs are not required recommend improvements as a safety upgrade.

www.MauiHomeInspections.com

[Mark Thorman]

The code before the 1982 code was and object 9 inches in diameter shall not pass thur the railing. A building built in '84' may predate the 1982 code cycle.


www.MauiHomeInspections.com

[John Evans]

Did the 1982 code require vertical rails? These horizontal rails are spaced at 5 3/4", but does it really matter when you are dealing with easily climbable horizontal railings at a 5th floor balcony? Sometimes common sense should prevail. The architects certainly should have been denied approval for the railing design, even in 1982.

[relliott]

Good catch
I would have the client contact the association as they may need to take care of it.

[Mark Thorman]

Originally Posted by jevans

Did the 1982 code require vertical rails?

It wasn't until the 2000 IRC that climbable railing (ladder effect) were prohibited but I believe that the later IRC codes even removed that requirement.

www.MauiHomeInspections.com

[William J. Decker]

Regardless of codes, it is unsafe. I call them out if for no other reason that to a) inform the client of the problem and b) cover my sorry butt from getting sued if a kid dies.

There are many conditions that the code allows or does not specifically prohibit that are, none the less, safety hazards.

Hope ths helps;

[John Evans]

Will,
I fully agree, you need to use common sense. The clients had their two year old with them, and I brought them out to the balconies to demonstrate how easy it would be for their child to climb on the railings. You have to wonder, what were the building achitects thinking?

[Mark Nicholet]

Code is bare minimum. I would call it out as well. Although they do look convenient for someone to climb and water some hanging flower baskets. New selling feature...

[David E. Helm]

In my location, the 4 inch code has been in effect for before that building was built. IRC isn't the end all and be all.

[Mark Thorman]

I could not call this out without some industry guideline or at least a safety warning from a government agency(none of which, to my knowledge, exist for this condition) . To use the words must be repaired does no one any good and causes confusion for the buyers when they think it is required to be fixed when it does not. I would mention it as a concern to my buyers and recommend plexiglass or some type of see thru sheild on the occupant side for more protection. I would also be more worried about the climb thur than the climb over.

www.MauiHomeInspections.com

[Mark Thorman]

I would recommend something like this.

http://www.totsafe.com/proddetail.asp?prod=910

[Jerry Bettencourt]

Definately a safety issue and needs to be mentioned in the report and to the client. However it may have met code at the time and we cannot say that it MUST be changed. That comes at the clients discretion.