Rollshutter Controversy

[fluffy]

This one caught my eye as I have some personal history in construction industry. The city's purpose in these situations is to ensure the safety of owners/tenants present and future. If unsafe conditions are present then by all means they should be corrected. As to liability, I sure hope those who claim they were told by city staff that a permit was not required can prove that somehow as that seems to be where the breakdown occurred, people either were led to believe they didn't need a permit, or they just side-stepped the requirement. Whether that sidestep was intentional or not is beside the point, if unsafe conditions are present then they should be corrected.

[southy]

So Fluffy that being said and having read both the story on Castanet and in the Herald, I get that feeling in my stomach again that this could cost taxpayers more money for lawyers. When will it end??

[LoneWolf_53]

That product was never intended to be used as a wall which is in effect what is being done on those balconies.

The original purpose of that concept was to protect people's homes and windows from damage in hurricane prone areas such as Florida, and in that case the product is installed over the windows.

The first thought that comes to mind for me is that such a product would effectively defeat aspects of the building code, in place to address safety concerns, such as stating that bedrooms have two points of egress, one being the door and the other more often than not a window.

A window wouldn't be much of an egress point if such a shutter were down and and power happened to be out. Even if they happened to have a manual crank as some do, it would still be only on one side, and not accessible by emergency personnel on the outside.

In buildings such as that the AC is often drawing air from the balcony, so proper function of that system would also be hindered.

It would appear that some companies are solely interested in moving product, and to heck with any negative fallout of that position.

[Dizzy1]

^^ Just about every house in Germany has them - not really to protect the windows but more so to keep the heat/cold out and road noise

[LoneWolf_53]

^^ Just about every house in Germany has them - not really to protect the windows but more so to keep the heat/cold out and road noise

I'm not disputing that, however I'd be willing to bet they also addressed the issue of AC units venting to the actual outdoors as opposed to a closed in room as would happen here when the shutters are down.

Do they also use them as walls which is what they are being used as in this instance?

[V-Rated]

What is the difference between the rollshutter and other shading devices?!
What is the big deal anyway? Is it a bylaw thing?

V!

[Dizzy1]

I'm not disputing that, however I'd be willing to bet they also addressed the issue of AC units venting to the actual outdoors as opposed to a closed in room as would happen here when the shutters are down.

Do they also use them as walls which is what they are being used as in this instance?

AC units in Germany? Lol - most stores don't even have AC ;)

Joking aside - most of them are on the windows but they are used for balconies as well - but heating/gas venting or anything like that is typically vented on the roof top so that's a non issue

[ferri]

http://www.castanet.net/edition/news-st ... htm#124143

[Piecemaker]

Easy solution: Inspect them. Safe ones can stay. Unsafe ones needs to be removed or safety issue needs to be corrected by condo owner. Cheaper to do that than to deal with court. Owners of the condos are tax-paying citizens, so give them a break on permit costs, etc. The train has left the station.

[fluffy]

A question that comes to mind is where is the supplier/installer in all of this. Ultimately, in the eyes of the law, the onus for proper permits is on the owner, but shouldn't the people who supply and install these things be aware of the code requirements involved? Any contractor in the building game knows that when you change the configuration of any space you might be changing the rules that applied when the space was first built. This goes back to what some of the owners claim they were told by the city building department in the first place. Whoever dropped the ball here should be stepping up to the plate, be it the homeowner, the city building department, or the supplier of the product.

[hozzle]

This reminds me of a situation a long time ago when the Regional District tried to pass a draft building code that in essence stated - "...any renovation, repairs, or construction required a permit."
Well it was almost passed but someone brought up a scenario about a repair... say at midnight your hot water tank burst and you called a 24hr plumbing service to fix the situation, under the proposed code you were repairing with out a permit and would be subject to a fine. Luckily the draft was defeated and I hope in this situation the city backs down, and true to life - you never always get what you wish :)
I know this situation has been tabled as a safety concern, but that is just smoke and mirrors IMHO.

edit: I didnt want to hijack the thread but look into the citys' position with regards to heat pumps... japan has used it for decades with out plumbing.

[cv23]

The first thought that comes to mind for me is that such a product would effectively defeat aspects of the building code, in place to address safety concerns, such as stating that bedrooms have two points of egress, one being the door and the other more often than not a window.
A window wouldn't be much of an egress point if such a shutter were down and and power happened to be out. Even if they happened to have a manual crank as some do, it would still be only on one side, and not accessible by emergency personnel on the outside.

Egress requirements through windows are only applicable to unsprinkled buildings built under Part 9(SFD's) of the BC Building Code. The interiors of the buildings in Penticton are sprinkled and the buildings fall under Part 3 of the BC Building Code. Because Part 3(Large Residential) buildings are usually taller window openings more often than not are specified to have restricted openings so people, especially children, and animals can not fall out of them.
I'll buy the excuse of fireplaces or A/C units venting into deck areas but because of the limited seating area and ability for BBQ's on most highrise balcony these items usually exhaust/intake from the exterior walls outside of the balconies.

Many municipalities in BC take issue with closing in balconies simply because it increases the "living space" of individual units no longer making the entire building conform to maximum allowable square footage of living space the origonal building permit was issued for. This increase in living space to a unit adds value to the unit that the municipality has a tough time putting a value on for taxation purposes.
This issue has nothing to do with safety but all to do with the municipality feeling they are missing out on a few tax dollars.

[GordonH]

Do these roll shutters have a manual way to open them quickly, in case of fire (if electricity is cutoff). Since there are only 2 way to escape in a condo, 1 being the door the other the balcony via a ladder.

[cv23]

Do these roll shutters have a manual way to open them quickly, in case of fire (if electricity is cutoff). Since there are only 2 way to escape in a condo, 1 being the door the other the balcony via a ladder.

These buildings are 8 stories tall so the occupants better have a pretty tall ladder.

[hozzle]

I'm guessing the intent is for egress via balcony with the assistance from fire/rescue when it comes to the top floors?