DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
We agree with the Supreme Court that the defendants had no duty to warn since the condition which allegedly caused the plaintiff to fall was readily observable by the reasonable use of one's senses (see, Casamassa v. Waldbaums's Inc., 276 A.D.2d 659; Tarrazi v. 2025 Richmond Ave. Assocs., 260 A.D.2d 468; Campanaro v. Arizona Lipnob Estates, 259 A.D.2d 581; Arthur v. New York City Housing Auth., 14 A.D.2d 519, affd 12 N.Y.2d 982).