Minimum obstruction height to block walkway path without being a tripping hazard 1

[JDV22]

Hello!

I am currently looking for information pertaining to tripping hazards, specifically how tall an obstruction can be before it is no longer considered a tripping hazard. I have seen plenty of information showing that a 3/8" or 1/2" deviation in the walking surface constitutes a tripping hazard, but what I would like to know is at what minimum height, something is no longer a tripping hazard.

Logic would state that I could safely assume 42", which is standard guardrail height, but my client would like to put planters down to prevent pedestrians from walking through a specific area.

The client put a canopy over top of an entry way, and now there are braces within 80" of the ground (head height clearance issue). He'd like to put planters directly under the braces, so that it is not a potential walkway, and therefor does not need to meet the 80" head clearance. What I am looking for is some sort of code reference or piece of information where I can tell him that he can fasten down 18" tall planters for example, and be able to make the assumption that nobody will walk under the brace because of the obstruction in the path.

Thanks for any help or insight!

 

[IRstuff]

A picture might help. How about something that's above knee height, say 24 inches?

https://ergoweb.com/anthropometry/

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg

faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list

http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm

 

[GC_Hopi]

I would say you need something that is visible in your peripheral when you are walking. Not sure if its codified anywhere, you should ask an Architect. My feeling is that something greater than 20 inches (typical park bench sitting height) should be good and if there are tall plants then that would help.

 

[Enable]

I don't quite understand the setup but the min curb height so that it is not a tripping hazard depends on your local code (if it's even specified sometimes it is not). But surely the min height it is not more than the minimum allowable riser for a set of stairs. In Ontario that's 125mm.

BTW for minimal deviations in pathway see CSA B651 or your local accessibility standard (I am mentioning this because you brought up 3/8" to 1/2" deviations as hazards). If something is a hazard depends on elevation difference as well as also the bevel/slope.

 

[Harbringer]

Sounds like a good question for the architect.

 

[DBronson]

JDV22:

If you're in the US and the walkway is used by the public the ADA applies. For an accessible walkway an abrupt level change of 1/4" maximum is allowed, a level change of 1/2" maximum is allowed if the edge is beveled. See article 303 in the code. As you mentioned minimum headroom for accessible pathways is 80" (see article 307.2) If planters are used they need to be a maximum 27" tall (again see article 307.2) Be sure that the clear pathway between planters is at least 36". Note that objects less than 80" high can protrude into the walkway 4". If the braces at 4" into the walkway are above 80" they may be allowed. Best to consult the AHJ.

Regards,

DB

 

[LittleInch]

I think this is the code of common sense.

A lot depends on whether people can see it from a long way or could turn into the space and not see a low obstruction. How well lit it is, what colour, will it always have tall plants in it?

At where I used to work at the bottom of a set of wide steps there was a low brick flower bed about 12 to 16 inches off the ground. I saw a number of people go flying over it until it was eventually ruled to be a trip hazard.

Personally I would go with your 42". You can get some tall thin plant pots...



Remember - More details = better answers
Also: If you get a response it's polite to respond to it.

 

[JDV22]

Thanks for all the help everyone! There is a lot of really good insight here and plenty for me to ensure we are taking all appropriate safety measures into account during our design!

 

[JStructsteel]

He wants to block an entry way? Isnt a entry way also a exit way, and thus should not be blocked?

 

[JDV22]

JStructsteel:

It would not block the entry way, but rather cause people to take a more direct route to access the entry way. See the screen shot below of a quick markup:

The concern is rather than approaching the door directly, people may come in from the side and potentially hit their head off the brace. We are looking for advice on substantial of an obstruction we need to ensure (1), it is clearly visible and people do not inadvertently trip over the obstruction (and then smack their head off the brace in comedic fashion!), and (2) an obstruction large enough to make it abundantly clear that there is no walkway passing under the canopy from the side, and that if you are to access the area, you must enter head on.

Hopefully that clears things up!