Is there anything wrong with this.
Seems like the POCO can get away with a lot more than others can.
Is that temporary drop for a building being renovated/upgraded?
Older apartment building condo conversion. The building was fully occupied and the buyer was buying a unit from the original buyer who bought 2 years before.
Here is another one. Doesn’t this violate the “near a window” rule?
:shock: or shocking imagine only to survive the fire thinking that hey I’m going to jump and then you get the shock of your life. Where is the common sense :shock:
You only hope that when you hit the ground your heart restarts.
At least they could have provided a handrail??
If there were a “near-a-window” rule, I would say yes :mrgreen:, but there are “specific requirements” and it appears that this is a compliant installation.
From that pic the feeders are right on the cable line .
I was taught that there cannot be a drop (or drip loops) within 3’ (laterally) around a window.
Educate me, please.
Sides and bottom only. The top of the “openable” portion of the window must simply be below the conductors.
Thanks, Jeff.
Here is the reference;
[FONT=TimesNewRoman,Bold][size=2]
CEC 230.9(A) Clearance from Windows. Service conductors installed as open conductors or multiconductor cable without an overall outer jacket shall have a clearance of not less than 900 mm (3 ft) from windows that are designed to be opened, doors, porches, balconies, ladders, stairs, fire escapes, or similar locations.
*
Exception: Conductors run above the top level of a window shall be permitted to be less than the 900-mm (3-ft) requirement.
*[/size][/FONT]
Curious why you opened this thread with one of your old pictures?
William,
As Jeff stated, over the window is fine.
But it appears that your drip loop is hanging right next to the window opening. A clear Violation…
“Click to Enlarge”
]
Sorry, Mark. I thought it was another picture (the one with the multiple drop cables spliced to the service drop) before.
Just call me the Department of Redundancy Department :mrgreen:
The drop is clearly (don’t be fooled by the shadow) within the “openable” part of the window (the top also opens, and we do so, in Chicago. Old habits.).
I modified the picture slightly for clarity. The yellow line is the line below which the conductors are in violation. I colored the actual conductors in blue for clarity, since there are a lot of shadows. It’s not too hateful, in the end, but still a violation.
BTW, the service mast (the pipe) is inconsequential with regard to these window clearance rules.
Thanks, Mark.
Na, na na na na! I was right. 
Sorry Jeff. I just had to do it :mrgreen:
Which brings me to my point. Local code inspectors deal with “real world” problems, often caused by the POCO and they won’t be fixed (because the local codies don’t want, or can’t, require the POCO to fix it).
And, the owner is not properly served.
Maybe they chould pass a law that passed fiduciary responsibility onto the local governmental entity.
Now, THAT, would be good.
But, it would probably put all home inspectors out of business.
And it goes on.
How was I supposed to know that you “Chicagwians” have windows that open at the top and bottom? 
With that, I will concede that this installation is improper.
You need to get around more Jeff. Their called double hung.
California. Go figure :mrgreen:
Just a joke, Jeff.
I wouldn’t have asked if I was sure.
Iron sharpens iron.
The process is better known as Irony