Thread: New backyard swing.

Hey Kids, now you just climb up on the top of the jungle jim and grab the service wires and swing down...Lots of fun for all.

Similar Threads:

• Door swing over stairs
• 2-year-old boy drowns in backyard swimming pool in Hollywood - Sun-Sentinel.com
• Backyard Boulders
• 4-year-old Orange County girl drowns in backyard pool - InjuryBoard.com
• My Safe Florida Home program in full swing - Vero Beach Press-Journal (subscription)

Hmmmm no drip loop.

Isn't that one of those new fangled toys ... everyone kid would love to have their very own zip line across the jungle backyard.

Yes, and electric powered zip line. The service wiring was 36 inches above the playset. It actually looks further away in the photo. Crazy.

I had one like that not too long ago. Any kid 4' or taller could reach up and grab this service drop cable without even jumping.

Lots of potential "Multiple Generation Darwin Award" material there.

Speaking of children, check out the child slide to this pool and its placement over the pool steps. Numerous violations to mention them all.

Rick

Originally Posted by Gene South

Hey Kids, now you just climb up on the top of the jungle jim and grab the service wires and swing down...Lots of fun for all.

Gene, it looks like the playset is all plastic which should provide ample isolation.

You just have to keep reminding them not to touch it! Great for memory testing! Do a head count every evening. YIKES!

Looks more like a ZAP line...

Hmmm.

Code doesn't specify clearance above a swing set.

That's probably the argument you'd get from persons who see nothing wrong with the situation as depicted.

230.9 only covers Clearances on Buildings.

However, the first sentence of 230.24, " Service conductors shall not be readily accessible....."

Hard to discern from the picture but I would ensure that the following specifications are met:

230.24(B) Vertical Clearance for Service-Drop Conductors.

(1) 3.0 m (10 ft) - at the electrical service entrance to buildings....

(2) 3.7 m (12 ft) - over residential property....

And the lack of a drip loop but that's probably how they met 230.24(B)(1).

I know that I truncated the code language in the interest of time but I hope patrons of this site understand the references.

Other than that, how parents choose to "weed out" the less intelligent children of the species is usually protected by law.

No license required to have or raise a child.

Originally Posted by Richard D. Fornataro

Code doesn't specify clearance above a swing set.

Code DOES specify a clearance above THAT particular swing set (and other swing sets like it).

If you can't find it, I will show it to you.

I see a few NEC references in this thread. It's highly likely that the NEC does not apply to these conductors since they're under the purview of the utility. That's not to say that the utility might not have similar requirements for clearances.

90.2 Scope.
(B) Not Covered. This Code does not cover the following:
(1) Installations in ships, watercraft other than floating buildings, railway rolling stock, aircraft, or automotive vehicles other than mobile homes and recreational vehicles
FPN: Although the scope of this Code indicates that the Code does not cover installations in ships, portions of this Code are incorporated by reference into Title 46, Code of Federal Regulations, Parts 110–113.
(2) Installations underground in mines and self-propelled mobile surface mining machinery and its attendant electrical trailing cable
(3) Installations of railways for generation, transformation, transmission, or distribution of power used exclusively for operation of rolling stock or installations used exclusively for signaling and communications purposes
(4) Installations of communications equipment under the exclusive control of communications utilities located outdoors or in building spaces used exclusively for such installations
(5) Installations under the exclusive control of an electric utility where such installations
a. Consist of service drops or service laterals, and associated metering or,
b. Are located in legally established easements or rights-of-way designated by or recognized by public service commissions, utility commissions, or other regulatory agencies having jurisdiction for such installations, or
c. Are on property owned or leased by the electric utility for the purpose of communications, metering, generation, control, transformation, transmission, or distribution of electric energy.

- 230.24 Clearances.
- - Service-drop conductors shall not be readily accessible and shall comply with 230.24(A) through (D) for services not over 600 volts, nominal.
- - (B) Vertical Clearance for Service-Drop Conductors. Service-drop conductors, where not in excess of 600 volts, nominal, shall have the following minimum clearance from final grade:
- - - (1) 3.0 m (10 ft) — at the electrical service entrance to buildings, also at the lowest point of the drip loop of the building electrical entrance, and above areas or sidewalks accessible only to pedestrians, measured from final grade or other accessible surface only for service-drop cables supported on and cabled together with a grounded bare messenger where the voltage does not exceed 150 volts to ground
- - - (2) 3.7 m (12 ft) — over residential property and driveways, and those commercial areas not subject to truck traffic where the voltage does not exceed 300 volts to ground
- - - (3) 4.5 m (15 ft) — for those areas listed in the 3.7-m (12-ft) classification where the voltage exceeds 300 volts to ground
- - - (4) 5.5 m (18 ft) — over public streets, alleys, roads, parking areas subject to truck traffic, driveways on other than residential property, and other land such as cultivated, grazing, forest, and orchard

Jerry,

Don't be bashful now.

Quote me the code concerning THAT particular swing set if you wouldn't mind.

You did show the complete Code quotes that I myself had abbreviated in my original response.

I didn't mean to abridge them.

It was purely a reflection of the time I had to allocate to the response.

As it regards those clearances.

When I quote such clearances per the NEC to the utiltiy, about half the time the response is that overhead service conductor DO come under the exclusive control of the utility and are therefore not my responsibility.

As an inspector, I can merely point those issues of ground or property clearances out to them (the utility).

If they choose to ignore them, I can only walk away with the chilling thought of what COULD happen to a child etc. because someone chooses to have an attitude about such.

Originally Posted by Richard D. Fornataro

As it regards those clearances.

When I quote such clearances per the NEC to the utility, about half the time the response is that overhead service conductor DO come under the exclusive control of the utility and are therefore not my responsibility.

As an inspector, I can merely point those issues of ground or property clearances out to them (the utility).

If they choose to ignore them, I can only walk away with the chilling thought of what COULD happen to a child etc. because someone chooses to have an attitude about such.

The NEC basically tells us that in 90.2(B)(5). Although there is plenty of information in Article 230 regarding clearances none of that would apply if the parameters of 90.2(B)(5) are applicable to the installation.

Originally Posted by Richard D. Fornataro

Jerry,

Don't be bashful now.

Quote me the code concerning THAT particular swing set if you wouldn't mind.

That is like asking for a code which specifically addresses ANY GIVEN sidewalk, patio, deck, or balcony - no code is going to say that the sidewalk, patio, deck, balcony as 123 Main Street, Anytown, Mystate, USA as requiring 10 feet minimum clearance.

Criminey, man, think! The code is referring to ANY such similar location, and, yes, that platform on THAT OR ANY swing set meets such similar location.

Oh, wait, the section requiring GFCI protection does not apply to every house ... only those specifically addressed in the code ... who are you trying to kid? Yourself?

Originally Posted by Rick Hurst

Speaking of children, check out the child slide to this pool and its placement over the pool steps. Numerous violations to mention them all.

Rick

That looks like fun. We used to do all sorts of crazy stuff when we were kids including riding moving huge metal slides then riding bikes down them sometimes it worked sometimes we went home all bruised and cut up.

Originally Posted by Robert Rolleston

That looks like fun. We used to do all sorts of crazy stuff when we were kids including riding moving huge metal slides then riding bikes down them sometimes it worked sometimes we went home all bruised and cut up.

We used to pull each other on skate boards behind cars at 40 mph ... wiping out there was absolutely no fun ... but that did not stop us. Ever try flying through the air at 40 mph doing everything you could to stay aloft long enough to fly over that concrete sidewalk and hit the grass on the other side instead?

We also had a section with streets in town which were like those in San Francisco - you know the ones, down the hill, across a street, down the next hill, across another street, and down the next hill, etc. - at the bottom was heavily traveled US 1 ... our only safe option was to make a 90 degree turn onto that last cross street before continuing down and across US 1. Sometimes we made that turn and all was fine ... sometimes we did not make that turn in fine fashion and ended up plowing into the back of parked cars (did that more than once).

Or surfing during hurricanes when there were some real waves to ride.

I think most kids did real stupid things, and that most of those kids survived (I personally knew some who did not survive doing those same stupid things, but even that did not stop us.)

The song says "Only the good die young.", I think it could also be said that "The stupid live long lives." because that sure is the way it seems at times.

Famous last words from a redneck: "Hey, Bubba, watch this ... "

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

Code DOES specify a clearance above THAT particular swing set (and other swing sets like it).

If you can't find it, I will show it to you.

Jerry,

You forgot your meds again today, didn't you?

Your quote is pasted up above.

YOU said you'd show it to me.

I merely requested that you follow through.

My God...grow the F... up!

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

That is like asking for a code which specifically addresses ANY GIVEN sidewalk, patio, deck, or balcony - no code is going to say that the sidewalk, patio, deck, balcony as 123 Main Street, Anytown, Mystate, USA as requiring 10 feet minimum clearance.

Criminey, man, think! The code is referring to ANY such similar location, and, yes, that platform on THAT OR ANY swing set meets such similar location.

Oh, wait, the section requiring GFCI protection does not apply to every house ... only those specifically addressed in the code ... who are you trying to kid? Yourself?

Try 230.94, the first sentence. "Service conductors shall not be accessible..."

Are you psychotic?

One day you behave like a knowledgable, decent human being and the next you attack everything, anyone writes.

Give us a break and stick to your medication regimen will you.

Originally Posted by Richard D. Fornataro

Jerry,

You forgot your meds again today, didn't you?

Your quote is pasted up above.

YOU said you'd show it to me.

I merely requested that you follow through.

My God...grow the F... up!




Try 230.94, the first sentence. "Service conductors shall not be accessible..."

Are you psychotic?

One day you behave like a knowledgable, decent human being and the next you attack everything, anyone writes.

Give us a break and stick to your medication regimen will you.

Originally Posted by Richard D. Fornataro

Try 230.94, the first sentence. "Service conductors shall not be accessible..."

Richard,

I see you swapped my meds for your meds, and you really got all messed up.

Apply the same standard to all or stick to your sand box which the cats use, helps make those lumpy piles you call 'castles'.

If you want to insist on a specific reference in the code for one thing, you need to maintain that insistence for everything else. Crimeny.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

Richard,

I see you swapped my meds for your meds, and you really got all messed up.

Apply the same standard to all or stick to your sand box which the cats use, helps make those lumpy piles you call 'castles'.

If you want to insist on a specific reference in the code for one thing, you need to maintain that insistence for everything else. Crimeny.

Jerry,

Still not sure how to read you.

Don't confuse me for one of your mentally-addled playmates in the sand box at the Shangri La retirement community, also known as The Asylum.

I'm sure that I am just as confused by your nefarious commentary as everyone else who reads this forum.

Once again, you said you could provide code for your rambling retort and when challenged to do so you chose to act like an unpleasant child on the playground and even referenced a common fixture you would customarily be found readily drooling within.

However, as is customary on odd.... or is it even days, you failed to provide that which you bragadociously boasted you could.

Additionally, you failed to even recognize that I had already provided such in my initial response.

Just to clear things up in this quotidian casting of aspersions upon my character, did one of my relatives step on your puppy or something?

Or are you really just the cantankerous old man that everyone who patronizes this forum knows you to be?

Perfect example of the tenet....

"When people show you who they are......believe them."

Originally Posted by Richard D. Fornataro

I'm sure that I am just as confused by your nefarious commentary as everyone else who reads this forum.

I understand why you are confused - your meds are supposed to be one-per-day, meaning one pill per day, not one bottle per day ... perfectly understandable as to your state of confusion.

Once again, you said you could provide code for your rambling retort and when challenged to do so you chose to act like an unpleasant child on the playground and even referenced a common fixture you would customarily be found readily drooling within.

I have provided the required code reference, your confused state of mind refuses to let you read and absorb what is written without applying your twisted confusion to it.

The overhead service drop has a minimum height above a grade, walking service, or platform ... ANY ... grade, walking surface, or platform.

The code does not address whether or not *you* think it applies to *your* grade, walking surface or platform as the code applies to ANY (i.e., "all") such grades, walking surfaces, or platforms.

You are sounding like Watson, only Watson actually knew what he was talking about albeit he would go out in left field after typing a few sentences.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

You are sounding like Watson, only Watson actually knew what he was talking about albeit he would go out in left field after typing a few sentences.

.
Now Don't Be Talking about My Pud !
.

In the land of deregulation, it is the exception no longer the rule that a service drop is "under the exclusive control and ownership of the utility". It is more often/common than not that the customer is responsible for the lateral or drop and everything from the first pole.

Regardless of the deplorable and unprofessional banter, the OP play/activity/swing set is neither permanent nor afixed to the property, it is personal property which is not part of the real estate transaction.

In its present location it is a safety violation and placed in conflict with the NEC -- at the time it was placed under the service drop -- and in violation of the property maintenance code.

The gray molded section is an elevated platform.

The play set where located is a hazard, as it has been assembled and placed in an unsafe location. It matters not that it is plastic (and frankly you have no idea if carbon content is sufficient to be conductive, it is neither tested or proven to be an insulator), it retains water, surface tension, is in contact with the moist ground and provides unsafe access to and encroaches on the required safety clearance to the conductors.

The defect regarding lack of a proper drip loop and questionable splices of the triplex strung under the CATV drop from the pole, must be remediated, this may likely be at a cost to the property owner.

Unknown height at drop, doesn't look to be more than 9-1/2 feet at the building above the meter doesn't appear to be more than 7'.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

Ever try flying through the air at 40 mph doing everything you could to stay aloft long enough to fly over that concrete sidewalk and hit the grass on the other side instead?

Those were the fun times. Parents now would try to sue the person who made the skateboard sidewalk or bike. Was many times I spent in the ER after doing crazy stuff. Had one bike accident they thought I was on a dirt bike or motorcycle. Would come home all banged up screaming in pain and parents would be like grow up. Now parents are like who can we sue to make a million.

Simple solution recommend the swing be moved. I doubt it's bolted to the ground.