ᐅ Bathtub placed in front of window, parapet too low, general contractor is refusing to cooperate
Created on: 20 Sep 2021 14:02
B
BananaJoe
Hello everyone,
we are building our house with a general contractor (GC) and have agreed on a fixed price.
In the bathroom, we have a window with a sill height of 1.12 m (3 ft 8 in) finished floor level (FFL), which is partially located above the bathtub and a small shelf (between the bathtub and the exterior wall), on the right side in the picture.
Both I and our expert noticed that according to the building regulations (Hessen), parapet or railing heights must be at least 80 cm (31.5 inches), measured either from finished floor level (which is complied with here) or from any steps, platforms, or similar climbing aids located in front of it (which is not the case here due to the bathtub and shelf). Although we have lockable handles on the upper floor window, our expert says an additional safety measure is required, for example, the installation of a (glass) railing similar to those used on French balconies.
This is also reflected in the recommendations for enforcement of the Hessian Building Code issued by the Ministry of Economic Affairs (marginal note 35.3.1):
“The height of the parapet is generally measured from the top edge of the finished floor to the top edge of the window sill or another fixed parapet-like element, excluding the window frame. If there are elements in front of the parapet, such as cable ducts or ventilation channels, which could be used to climb up, the measurement must be taken from the top edge of those elements.”
Since we have two small children who will eventually bring friends home to play, we strongly believe that some safety provision is necessary here. Our GC, however, sees no need for action because the window has a lockable handle. I have already informed the GC that we would report this issue to the responsible building authority if necessary, so they can verify whether this is compliant (we have built under an exemption procedure, so the building application has not yet been reviewed in detail). Based on the Ministry’s recommendation, I am quite confident that the authority will agree with our expert.
Now to my question: who pays for the additional safety measure (assuming the building authority requires it)?
From a brief search, I found fairly good glass railings (since our bathroom window faces the street, we want the railing to be as discreet as possible, e.g., no bars or similar) for about 500 euros. Including installation, I expect the total cost would not exceed 1,000 euros.
In my view, it’s simple: I purchased a house that complies with legal requirements. If the GC’s planning does not meet these standards and requires rework, they should cover the cost. The GC (or our site manager), on the other hand, argues that if the building authority demands the railing, it was simply overlooked in the planning and therefore not included in the fixed price. If they had known the railing was needed, the price would have been higher, meaning we should bear the cost.
I consider that unreasonable; otherwise, fixed prices are pointless. As a layperson, I assume that the fixed price guarantees a house that meets legal standards. Otherwise, the GC could plan anything and later—if it turns out the structure is unsafe, violates the zoning plan, or is otherwise incorrect—increase the price by whatever amount is necessary to fix the planning mistake...
What’s your opinion?
we are building our house with a general contractor (GC) and have agreed on a fixed price.
In the bathroom, we have a window with a sill height of 1.12 m (3 ft 8 in) finished floor level (FFL), which is partially located above the bathtub and a small shelf (between the bathtub and the exterior wall), on the right side in the picture.
Both I and our expert noticed that according to the building regulations (Hessen), parapet or railing heights must be at least 80 cm (31.5 inches), measured either from finished floor level (which is complied with here) or from any steps, platforms, or similar climbing aids located in front of it (which is not the case here due to the bathtub and shelf). Although we have lockable handles on the upper floor window, our expert says an additional safety measure is required, for example, the installation of a (glass) railing similar to those used on French balconies.
This is also reflected in the recommendations for enforcement of the Hessian Building Code issued by the Ministry of Economic Affairs (marginal note 35.3.1):
“The height of the parapet is generally measured from the top edge of the finished floor to the top edge of the window sill or another fixed parapet-like element, excluding the window frame. If there are elements in front of the parapet, such as cable ducts or ventilation channels, which could be used to climb up, the measurement must be taken from the top edge of those elements.”
Since we have two small children who will eventually bring friends home to play, we strongly believe that some safety provision is necessary here. Our GC, however, sees no need for action because the window has a lockable handle. I have already informed the GC that we would report this issue to the responsible building authority if necessary, so they can verify whether this is compliant (we have built under an exemption procedure, so the building application has not yet been reviewed in detail). Based on the Ministry’s recommendation, I am quite confident that the authority will agree with our expert.
Now to my question: who pays for the additional safety measure (assuming the building authority requires it)?
From a brief search, I found fairly good glass railings (since our bathroom window faces the street, we want the railing to be as discreet as possible, e.g., no bars or similar) for about 500 euros. Including installation, I expect the total cost would not exceed 1,000 euros.
In my view, it’s simple: I purchased a house that complies with legal requirements. If the GC’s planning does not meet these standards and requires rework, they should cover the cost. The GC (or our site manager), on the other hand, argues that if the building authority demands the railing, it was simply overlooked in the planning and therefore not included in the fixed price. If they had known the railing was needed, the price would have been higher, meaning we should bear the cost.
I consider that unreasonable; otherwise, fixed prices are pointless. As a layperson, I assume that the fixed price guarantees a house that meets legal standards. Otherwise, the GC could plan anything and later—if it turns out the structure is unsafe, violates the zoning plan, or is otherwise incorrect—increase the price by whatever amount is necessary to fix the planning mistake...
What’s your opinion?
H
hampshire22 Sep 2021 00:11Myrna_Loy schrieb:
In my opinion, you will hit a brick wall here. As has been mentioned several times, the regulation regarding railing heights is based on adults. I see it differently, because although the regulations support a contractor’s reluctance, they do not explicitly require it.
SumsumBiene schrieb:
I was already able to clearly explain to my daughter at 2 1/2 years old what she should avoid. My experience with people in general, and with my children in particular, is that knowledge of rules and dangers is sometimes separate from actual behavior.
BananaJoe schrieb:
As far as I understand, in terms of whether the railing is too low under Hessian building regulations, it does not depend on which side the window hinge is on, but I am happy to be corrected. That’s correct.
I now see five objectives:
The situation should be executed properly
A hazardous situation and any associated liability should be avoided
The solution should operate without special attention, such as a lock needing to be controlled
The solution must not prevent ventilation of the room
The contractor should bear the costs of proper execution
Then it’s simple: determine what constitutes proper execution, or have it determined. Pay the difference between the contractor’s proposed proper solution and the desired solution.
B
BananaJoe22 Sep 2021 09:55hampshire schrieb:
I identify five goals here:
The situation should be executed properly.
A hazardous situation and any associated liability should be avoided.
The solution should operate without requiring special attention, such as a closing mechanism that needs to be monitored.
The solution must not obstruct the room’s ventilation.
The general contractor (GC) should bear the costs for proper execution.
Then it’s simple: determine what is required by regulations or have it determined. Pay the difference between the GC’s proposed compliant solution and the desired solution. Five times yes. Very good summary and likely a forecast of the outcome...
You could write to let us know how it turned out, or rather, who has to pay for the barrier now.
Not completely off-topic: did you know that it is "not uncommon" for children to drown in bathtubs?
I don’t have a comparison to falls from windows, but as far as I have read, drowning is still the leading cause of death in children up to 6 years old. However, this does not apply only to bathtubs.
Not completely off-topic: did you know that it is "not uncommon" for children to drown in bathtubs?
I don’t have a comparison to falls from windows, but as far as I have read, drowning is still the leading cause of death in children up to 6 years old. However, this does not apply only to bathtubs.
haydee schrieb:
But not only in the bathtub, also in swimming pools, lakes, rivers.Tonight I will probably end up dreaming about forest lakes with locked window handles...https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
B
BananaJoe20 Oct 2021 22:50So, first update:
Statement from the general contractor’s expert: “Mr. XXX must have planned this, right? This won’t work!”
At least this saved me a trip to the building authority, as the general contractor now wants to look for a solution that makes sense for everyone. The contractor’s expert also insisted that the standard glass pane must be replaced with a laminated safety glass pane.
Let’s see what the contractor proposes; I’m afraid it will end up being just the top-hinged (tilt-only) option. What gives me hope is the laminated safety glass. That will surely cost a few euros to replace. Of course, he could save that cost by installing the glass balustrade on the outside (naturally laminated safety glass), which I suspect might even be cheaper...
Statement from the general contractor’s expert: “Mr. XXX must have planned this, right? This won’t work!”
At least this saved me a trip to the building authority, as the general contractor now wants to look for a solution that makes sense for everyone. The contractor’s expert also insisted that the standard glass pane must be replaced with a laminated safety glass pane.
Let’s see what the contractor proposes; I’m afraid it will end up being just the top-hinged (tilt-only) option. What gives me hope is the laminated safety glass. That will surely cost a few euros to replace. Of course, he could save that cost by installing the glass balustrade on the outside (naturally laminated safety glass), which I suspect might even be cheaper...