Safety standards for scenery

[Mr. Manager]

Hello friends,

I work in a road house and we recently had a group come in with a set rented from another group. We immediately as "the house" had some challenges with the safety of the set. It was going to be used for a show involving adults and kids and we just weren't comfortable with some things like cross-bracing (or lack thereof,) sub-par hand rails on platforms, etc. We raised the concern and the group providing the rental came in and addressed the concerns to our satisfaction. What I'm wondering is if anyone knows of a written standard that we can point renters to ahead of time to ensure that they know what our expectations are ahead of time. There are the ANSI standards, but I'm looking for something that's a little more accessible of a read to the community theater crowd, but still complies with the ANSI standards. This whole thing's made me realize that I know when I see something that's unsafe, but I'm basing that on experience, not on a standard I can show someone. Thoughts??

 

[MNicolai]

Building code requirements generally apply for things like platforms/steps/railings. Some people like to argue that as an "art installation" they are exempt, but typically they are only exempt from having to apply for a permit and inspection by AHJ (local codes may vary but IIRC this is how IBC is written). In some of the grey areas I've pointed a couple AHJ's to Raoul's "Stock Scenery Construction Handbook" as an example of something that demonstrates common industry-wide safe practices. Doesn't apply to every condition obviously but for those who are not regularly engaged in inspecting stage scenery it may provide some comfort to them in what they're looking at. Stressed skin platforms are one of the scenery types that comes to mind as something that may furrow a building inspector's brow at first glance.

As a road house I would expect your contracts to reserve the right to deny unsafe scenery/effects/practices on your stage and failure to meet applicable codes/standards and industry best practices may result in cancellation of event at renter's expense and without refund. Obviously you want to work with them and do not want to turn them away, but if they show up on a Thursday morning and the performance is Friday, they may not be able to do much to rectify the situation aside from strike entire set pieces from the show.

The unfortunate reality is that if renters don't know how to practice safe sets, usually there are bigger issues and no book or standard is going to help them much. Budget, time constraints, lack of proper tooling, reusing old set pieces, volunteer or student labor, and having nobody in place willing and comfortable saying "No" to the director when required.

Before I moved to FL I used to help school district out because the local roadhouse gave them an ultimatum to hire a technical director supervising construction, rehearsals, and performances, or they would stop allowing them to rent the facility. Apparently things were rough for a few years but the tipping point that forced the roadhouse's hand was a production of Oklahoma where two locomotives were supposed to criss cross the stage one in front of the other with stagehands hiding upstage pushing their trains along. There was somehow a collision at center stage and they had to bring the main curtain in for 30 minutes and sort it all out. Another time they had a dancer dance into the pit. Another time they had 3 people jump on the rope for the main curtain to bring it in and jumped on the rope so hard none of the operators noticed that they had pulled the main traveler track almost all of the way to the floor. Think they also at some point traveled the main closed while it was in too far, bunched up on the stage floor, and ripped the first couple feet of the curtain off of the master carrier.

Long story short, these rentals pose risks to safety as well as incur lots of extra wear and tear on the theater, some of which the renter will be forced to make you whole on and some of which you end up having to eat the cost on. Sometimes you need to require they provide a professional or their next rental fee will be marked up to include one appointed by the venue to ensure 1) they have safe scenery before they load-in, 2) oversee the on-site rental above and beyond what the roadhouse would typically do for an average rental, and 3) supervise the load-out.

 

[JonCarter]

When I was designing and building sets ('50s & '60s) we never worried about building codes and no theatre I ever worked in had their own codes or written standards. The primary idea that drove our design and construction methods was common sense. If you have a return stair which actors have to descend in the dark, put railings on it and some tread lights so they can see. (Common sense.) If you have to build a 10' x 10' x 6' high platform which 8 people have to dance on,, build it to hold the load (say, 1200# x 3 for impact) and brace it for the horizontal forces. Common sense. Same with anything else. Just common sense. Sometimes it seems that people nowadays don't use that any more but depend on some "rule book" to solve all their problems.

 

[Mr. Manager]

Thanks for your reply. Yeah, we don't let them operate our fly rail and we do have personnel there to watch over what they're doing and look out after safety, etc. The problem with requiring them to have a TD is that they'll say, fine, Jessica's dad is the TD and he'll be a guy who used to work in construction, or he's the dad who owns a drill. I, along with my TD, don't have a problem telling a client what they're doing is unsafe. I'm just trying to come up with a guideline I can give a client beforehand that says stuff like, "Hey, how about some safety rails," and "put some cross bracing on your platforms legs so that your set doesn't sway back and forth." They have so little time in the space, often by the time we know something's not going to work, they're planning to put kids on it to rehearse. I guess I'll have to write something. I know I'll have to include a catch-all like "And all other best practices and applicable standards." I will check out the Stock Scenery Handbook. I also found a couple of IATSE local handbooks that have some good general language. Thanks!

 

[Mr. Manager]

When I was designing and building sets ('50s & '60s) we never worried about building codes and no theatre I ever worked in had their own codes or written standards. The primary idea that drove our design and construction methods was common sense. If you have a return stair which actors have to descend in the dark, put railings on it and some tread lights so they can see. (Common sense.) If you have to build a 10' x 10' x 6' high platform which 8 people have to dance on,, build it to hold the load (say, 1200# x 3 for impact) and brace it for the horizontal forces. Common sense. Same with anything else. Just common sense. Sometimes it seems that people nowadays don't use that any more but depend on some "rule book" to solve all their problems.

Yes! I know how to build a safe set. In this case, I found myself looking at a set, that by the way has been used several times before, that made no sense to me. I didn't understand how the original builder thought it was safe. I'm not looking for a rule book, but a resource that tells the renter that if their set doesn't meet our standards, we won't let them endanger people on it. I'm not looking to teach them how to build sets either. I bet you and I would agree on most things, but might find some differences of opinion as to what is common sense in certain situations. Maybe not enough to causes either of us too much heartburn. They clearly thought their set was fine. It wasn't. So common sense wasn't working for them.

 

[Malabaristo]

When I was designing and building sets ('50s & '60s) we never worried about building codes and no theatre I ever worked in had their own codes or written standards. The primary idea that drove our design and construction methods was common sense. If you have a return stair which actors have to descend in the dark, put railings on it and some tread lights so they can see. (Common sense.) If you have to build a 10' x 10' x 6' high platform which 8 people have to dance on,, build it to hold the load (say, 1200# x 3 for impact) and brace it for the horizontal forces. Common sense. Same with anything else. Just common sense. Sometimes it seems that people nowadays don't use that any more but depend on some "rule book" to solve all their problems.

I find it strange that you seem to think it's somehow a bad thing to have a set of rules that lays out what the expectations are for safety. Obviously not everyone has the same "common sense" understanding of how to do everything, or we wouldn't be having this discussion. The rule book can't teach anyone how to be a carpenter, but it can help cut down on the number of times you have to explain things like, "No, drywall screws are not suitable for load-bearing applications..." and other similar conversations.

Whether or not everyone can agree that set construction is required to meet building codes, they do serve as a very useful reference for what is and isn't reasonable. My approach is to specifically address a few of the most common failures & mistakes, describe some theatre-specific exceptions, and then list the local code sections that are applicable as a general reference. You can't list every possible thing someone might do wrong, but you should be able to give enough general guidance to make your overall expectations clear.

 

[Colin]

The document I provide to renters includes verbatim sections of code, with citations, as well as "common sense" phrasing such as "all scenic elements must be secure at all times from unintended movement including wobbling, flexing, tipping, rolling, folding or collapsing." The specific code language where applicable, as well as my own related, quantified standards having to do with design loads and deflection help to make the point that "that oughta do it" and "it's only for one scene" and "nobody died last time" don't constitute responsible, safe design, and that if the reader can't navigate my language then they might not be qualified to design and build certain types of scenery. This has worked pretty well, but perhaps only because I also make myself very available to provide advice and resources to help people learn, so I'm not just overwhelming them to the point they shut down and ignore everything. Burying people in code and engineering terms without some support will either drive them to seek other venues or just not follow your rules and then you're back where you started.

PM if you'd like to see my full house rules document. I think there's an old version already attached to another thread on CB too.

 

[macsound]

The document I provide to renters includes verbatim sections of code, with citations, as well as "common sense" phrasing such as "all scenic elements must be secure at all times from unintended movement including wobbling, flexing, tipping, rolling, folding or collapsing." The specific code language where applicable, as well as my own related, quantified standards having to do with design loads and deflection help to make the point that "that oughta do it" and "it's only for one scene" and "nobody died last time" don't constitute responsible, safe design, and that if the reader can't navigate my language then they might not be qualified to design and build certain types of scenery. This has worked pretty well, but perhaps only because I also make myself very available to provide advice and resources to help people learn, so I'm not just overwhelming them to the point they shut down and ignore everything. Burying people in code and engineering terms without some support will either drive them to seek other venues or just not follow your rules and then you're back where you started.

PM if you'd like to see my full house rules document. I think there's an old version already attached to another thread on CB too.

I like your idea of having simple text about what things should and shouldn't do.
Goes a long way to just state simply that no scenic elemets can wobble than having an in-depth discussion or rule book about it. Kind of like the warning signs at public pools. Just enough information to save the idiots and have something to point to.

 

[Colin]

I like your idea of having simple text about what things should and shouldn't do.
Goes a long way to just state simply that no scenic elemets can wobble than having an in-depth discussion or rule book about it. Kind of like the warning signs at public pools. Just enough information to save the idiots and have something to point to.

Like your own personal General Duty clause, and like that it should be backed by specifics in as technical a language as needed to draw the necessary red lines.

 

[JonCarter]

"I find it strange that you seem to think it's somehow a bad thing to have a set of rules . . ." No, Malabaristo, I don't think it's strange to have a set of rules. I have never worked in a plant which did have one though, and we never had anything collapse, nor actors fall off of anything, nor actors trip on anything (except their own costumes!) Of course, this was back in the day of clinch nails to build flats, 6d, 10d and 16d double-head nails and the only srews we used were #9 flatheads for hardware attachment and #12 flatheads for strapping dollies together. (Nobody every heard of a "drywall screw.")

 

[BillConnerFASTC]

There is a set of rules, made into law by elected legislators, called the building code. Since in almost all jurisdictions (I found two where a permit is required) a set is exempt from requiring a permit, enforcement is rare, but not unheard of. At least in a good number of jurisdictions I suspect you could arrange for an inspection.

What an owner does or allows in their own building is up to them. If the owner wants a set of rules, it's their choice, but it probably comes with liabilities.

 

[Colin]

If the owner wants a set of rules, it's their choice, but it probably comes with liabilities.

How would owner's rules that meet or exceed the building code, and cite it, add to the owner's liability? If that's what you're saying, my insurance underwriter definitely disagrees.

 

[BillConnerFASTC]

First, it's not easy to write clear rules. I work on a lot of codes and standards committees and writing clear, unambiguous, and enforceable rules is very difficult.

Second, if you have a rule and there is an infraction that results in litigation, you'll be more liable because you did not enforce it. The people who brought it in can claim you approved it, so therefore your liable, not them.

Try it. Post a few here to vet them.

 

[Colin]

That's the response I expected. Your first point is well taken, and rings true for facility owners and managers, not just code and standard writers. Your second point just describes the nature of litigation; the finger pointing is an inevitability, and not having rules in a facility simply shifts the content of the finger pointing rather than reducing or eliminating it. I say that having never been part of such litigation, perhaps part luck and part because I do a pretty good job minimizing risk, but the experts who handle risk at the college seem to agree.

If there are no rules, how does the owner contend with OSHA compliance for their own employees whose jobs almost inevitably involve interaction with the renter's installations? Employees aren't allowed to set foot on stage? Been there, don't recommend it.

Enforcement is essential, but discrete from the question of rule content. Abandoning rules for fear of imperfect enforcement (or for that matter imperfect rules) constitutes a pretty poor standard of care by people who reasonably ought to have some degree of expertise in running a performance venue. The venue could simply require in writing that renters independently arrange inspections by AHJs, but those AHJs won't always take interest and show up, and when they don't that means the show can't happen if we're being responsible about this version of enforcement. That'll piss off the rental client and they'll take their business elsewhere. And if all the AHJs do show up then they're probably going to red tag something because nobody tried to explain the requirements to the amateur producer ahead of time. That too will piss off the rental client, and they'll take their business elsewhere.

So, make a good faith effort at a well-informed and well-enforced set of rules that make people safer, use an indemnity clause in the contract, have enough insurance, and get on with it. My risk management officer once said to me "if somebody gets hurt, everybody's getting sued no matter what" and that sounds about right to me. I don't believe that a judge or jury would find me less liable because I refused to share my understanding of codes and standards.

 

[BillConnerFASTC]

Why don't you simply work on enforcing the building and fire codes as written? That way you have the benefit of many years and thousands of experts input, and the clout of it being law.

 

[Colin]

That's the approach I attempted to describe in my first post in the thread. My document contains copied and pasted code, with citations. It also contains more accessible language that does not replace code, but simply draws attention to key safety goals (along with institutional rules that have nothing to do with code topics) so that readers will engage with the document rather than dismissing it as J. Doe Dance Academy is prone to do when presented with legalese they think of as generic "fine print" to be brushed aside. In the context of the whole document I don't think any reasonable reader would make the mistake of thinking that my somewhat more colloquial language constitutes or replaces code, which I quote and cite wherever I identify something applicable. Just handing the average renter a copy of the code doesn't work though. They need help digesting it, or they won't try.

 

[Mr. Manager]

Well, this is a healthy discussion. Thanks! I think there are two things at work here. 1. Trying to help people practice safer sets. -and- 2. Protecting liability. I'm hesitant to even wade into this as where I work is a owned by a municipality. It's a complicated issue which if not approached gently could lead to sweeping rules like, "Well, no scenery then!" in lieu of a liability-limiting but helpful guideline. I agree that most people I encounter who build and install sets these days in community theater and 99-seat theater have a limited understanding of code and best practices. As the guy who's opening the door for them, I'm mostly just looking to develop a tool that will help me avoid uncomfortable conversations that I am TOTALLY willing to have if peoples' safety is at stake. I have a background in facilities and construction project management. I'm no stranger to building code. Building code is not for people, it's for engineers. I kid. I guess what I'm looking to create is a document similar to what Colin is talking about. More of a scope document or specification that is a little more accessible than code, but references it so that it's not just "do this because I think it's a good idea." As far as liability goes, I think the best we can all do is at least share it rather than be the only liable party. OK, gotta work. Thanks friends. Colin, I'd love to see your document to use as a jumping off point. Thanks!

 

[scenicsauthoff]

If a group is coming into your house with their own set - and if you don't assist in building the set and simply rent the venue - you could easily put in a clause that exempts you from any liability for what they do on that stage. As long as it's not your stage that hurts them.

But to be a nice person and care for general safety, yes put in some vague wording recommending safety rails and proper rise/runs. But like others said, if you mandate it, then it comes back to you if you don't enforce it and something happens.

If this is a one-off thing or only this one company that has these issues, maybe just have a sit down with them explaining all your concerns and recommendations for solutions.