Are the balconies at OC a risk to toddlers?

[Robittybob1]

There is a Eurocode for handrail and balustrade heights.
For external the minimum height is 1100 mm.
Are you suggesting the building does not comply with the Eurocode? If so why are you suggesting it?

From the photo supplied and comparing my height to a measurement of 1100mm the balustrade is lower the Eurocode standard.  Whether the standard covers these existing buildings I don't know.

[Alice Purjorick]

Can you see any measurements? I can't.  It was Bridget O'Donnell who said ""I worried about the height of the balcony".  So maybe you need to ask her if she is "suggesting the building does not comply with the Eurocode?"
PS: Putting a measuring tape up against my body and imagining what a 1100 mm balustrade would be like and   it didn't feel low to me.  So I wonder what height it really is.

1100 mm as per the code. There is no valid reason reason to think otherwise. Unless you believe that internal components were used in error in which case it would be 950mm but you or Bridget would need a valid reason to think that.
I'll make it easy: The average human being is crap at estimating mass distance and time so
screw what Bridget O'Donnell thought about the balcony/balustrade height. For her opinion to count she would need to know how high it was as measured rather than viewed and guessed, added to a knowledge of Eurocodes allied to the construction industry. Had she that knowledge I am sure she would have said "the balustrades were below the height recommended by the the code" rather than the woolly remarks attributed to her.
The chain from start to finish on the building project will include but not be limited to:
Client;architect;structural engineering consultant;local planning officer;main contractor;balustrade subcontractor;building inspectors. I would imagine balustrades without the relevant code would have been noticed by most of those with remedial works carried out as a result.
Unless of course we are expected to believe there was a vast conspiracy theory around a p**s balling bit of hand rail ?

[Angelo222]

The McCann's apartment was a ground floor apartment even though it sat high on the pool side (south).  What amazes me is that the design of the security wall/railing shown below is such that a young child could climb up on it very easily and topple over onto the steps below.

It gets worse.  If you look at the wall further along it appears to be only about a foot high with no railing atop it.

To me that looks like an accident just waiting to happen?

[pathfinder73]

Railings were there on 3 May 2007.

[Robittybob1]

1100 mm as per the code. There is no valid reason reason to think otherwise. Unless you believe that internal components were used in error in which case it would be 950mm but you or Bridget would need a valid reason to think that.
...
Unless of course we are expected to believe there was a vast conspiracy theory around a p**s balling bit of hand rail ?

Once I'd worked out what you said in the ending bit I realised how right you are.  If we set out to prove the height of these balustrades and they are found to be substandard.  The building then having some minor defect in complying with the building code could mean that the company has a commercial reason to keep an accident resulting from these substandard balustrades quiet.
If say an accidental death occurred in another apartment and that cadaver somehow ended up in the McCann's apartment, we can have a source of cadaver odour without the requirement that Madeleine need die to be the suspected cause of the cadaver odour.

So immediately we could theoretically get a different picture of what could have happened that night.

[Alice Purjorick]

From the photo supplied and comparing my height too a measurement of 1100mm the balustrade is lower the Eurocode standard.  Whether the standard covers these existing buildings I don't know.

There is an old adage which covers distortion on photos. "Will that finger go up that nostril?"
Your point about codes and standards being?

 

[Robittybob1]

There is an old adage which covers distortion on photos. "Will that finger go up that nostril?"
Your point about codes and standards being?

I know as new standards have been introduced in NZ they are not applied to existing structure.  So were these buildings exempt from Euro-standards because of their vintage?

[Angelo222]

Railings were there on 3 May 2007.

Well spotted Pathfinder, I find that extremely significant.  Is there a record anywhere of them being taken away to be forensically examined?

That wall/railing combo looks to be no more than about 2' or 600mm high to me.

[Brietta]

The McCann's apartment was a ground floor apartment even though it sat high on the pool side (south).  What amazes me is that the design of the security wall/railing shown below is such that a young child could climb up on it very easily and topple over onto the steps below.

It gets worse.  If you look at the wall further along it appears to be only about a foot high with no railing atop it.

To me that looks like an accident just waiting to happen?

The thing is though that there is no evidence that any child has suffered serious injury or death having toppled from a balcony at any time or anywhere in Luz.

There is evidence that a child disappeared from her bedroom within a holiday apartment as well as evidence of an intruder.

Perhaps issues such as appropriate lighting ... security of apartment keys ... security patrols along the lines of those instituted in the open resort after Madeleine's disappearance might have had an effect had they been in force. 
The height of the balcony or lack of it is in my opinion an irrelevance.

[Alice Purjorick]

I know as new standards have been introduced in NZ they are not applied to existing structure.  So were these buildings exempt from Euro-standards because of their vintage?

So ?
They would have been built to what ever standard obtained at the time of construction. That is the norm with construction standards. Eurocodes kicked off life in 1980s. UK standards have been roughly the same since 1975. There is no credible reason to believe the standard obtaining at the time was not applied to this particular building so what is the beef ?.
It would not have been MW's responsibility to enforce the standard at the time of construction that is for sure. The owners of the properties would be responsible for ensuring that they complied all necessary and appropriate regulations when being let out to avoid potential litigation. MW's responsibility would be to ensure the owners had complied with the relevant regulations where MW were acting as the owners letting agents.

[stephen25000]

So ?
They would have been built to what ever standard obtained at the time of construction. That is the norm with construction standards. Eurocodes kicked off life in 1980s. UK standards have been roughly the same since 1975. There is no credible reason to believe the standard obtaining at the time was not applied to this particular building so what is the beef ?.
It would not have been MW's responsibility to enforce the standard at the time of construction that is for sure. The owners of the properties would be responsible for ensuring that they complied all necessary and appropriate regulations when being let out to avoid potential litigation. MW's responsibility would be to ensure the owners had complied with the relevant regulations where MW were acting as the owners letting agents.

...and b....r all to do with this case.

[Alice Purjorick]

Well spotted Pathfinder, I find that extremely significant.  Is there a record anywhere of them being taken away to be forensically examined?

That wall/railing combo looks to be no more than about 2' or 600mm high to me.

Look at the bottom of the stairs in the posted photo that is taken looking up.
Two things about it:
1. The rise on the stairs is constant but it don't look it in the pic do it ?. The rise at the top looks less than that at the bottom............... &%+((£
2. The rise will be between 150mm and 220mm (6" to 9" in Mickey Mouse money).
Regs say the top of the wall will be 900mm to 1000mm above the pitch line* of the stairway and parallel to it.
Play with dividers on the screen by all means for a sense check but it will only be a sense check.

All very interesting .................. 

[mercury]

The thing is though that there is no evidence that any child has suffered serious injury or death having toppled from a balcony at any time or anywhere in Luz.

There is evidence that a child disappeared from her bedroom within a holiday apartment as well as evidence of an intruder.

Perhaps issues such as appropriate lighting ... security of apartment keys ... security patrols along the lines of those instituted in the open resort after Madeleine's disappearance might have had an effect had they been in force. 
The height of the balcony or lack of it is in my opinion an irrelevance.

Maybe theres no evidence that any child fell over the balcony because children were not left alone to enable them to do so

[mercury]

There is a Eurocode for handrail and balustrade heights.
For external the minimum height is 1100 mm.
Are you suggesting the building does not comply with the Eurocode? If so why are you suggesting it?

Bridget could just have meant the height of the balcony DROP not the exact specifications of the railings
Balconies however low or high are climbable and no normal parents leave ther kids around them unsupervised

[Robittybob1]

Maybe theres no evidence that any child fell over the balcony because children were not left alone to enable them to do so

All the Tapas 9 left their kids alone.  So what are you talking about?  They were checked at regular intervals but there is plenty of time in between for untoward events to occur.  Others saw what the Tapas 9 were doing and may have copied it and suffered.  How can anyone know what other occupants of other apartments did to get a break once their children were down for the night?