BCAB #1629 - Climbability of Balcony Guards, Sentences 18.104.22.168.(1) and (2), Division B, 2006 BCBC
May 3, 2007
Re: Climbability of Balcony Guards, Sentences 22.214.171.124.(1) and (2), Division B, 2006 BCBC
The subject is a required guard for a residential balcony. The guard as installed has a continuous horizontal element at 533 mm above the deck, which is the base for the vertical members with continuous 50mm spacing between them. The area below the horizontal member is solid with no openings or protrusions, excepting some mounting elements for the spaced/open guard above.
Reason for Appeal
Sentence 126.96.36.199.(1) requires that a guard be designed so that no member, attachment or opening will facilitate climbing. Further, Sentence 188.8.131.52.(2) specifies criteria for elements protruding from the vertical, and where these are met the guard is deemed to comply with Sentence (1). The list of conditions in Sentence (2) are independent of each other, (not cumulative where all conditions must be met).
The appellant contends the design of the guard complies with the independent conditions of Sentence 184.108.40.206.(2). (The only horizontal member between the deck and the top of the guard is located at 533 mm.)
Building Official's Position
The Building Official considers the guard to be climbable and does not comply with the requirements of Sentence 220.127.116.11.(1)
Appeal Board Decision #1629
It is the determination of the Board that the design of the guard is climbable and does not comply with Sentence 18.104.22.168.(1).
George Humphrey, Chair