• Welcome to the new and improved Building Code Forum. We appreciate you being here and hope that you are getting the information that you need concerning all codes of the building trades. This is a free forum to the public due to the generosity of the Sawhorses, Corporate Supporters and Supporters who have upgraded their accounts. If you would like to have improved access to the forum please upgrade to Sawhorse by first logging in then clicking here: Upgrades

Purpose of curb ramp wings?

Yikes

Gold Member
Joined
Nov 2, 2009
Messages
3,022
Location
Southern California
Looking for opinions:
1. Why do curb ramps have side wings? At 10% slope, they are technically too steep for a wheelchair. Is it just to keep pedestrians from tripping over an abrupt edge?
2. If the wings do not serve a functional purpose for wheelchairs, then on a public street corner would it be OK to have items such as a flush pull box lid or even an existing power pole or traffic signal pole be located within the wing area?

curb-ramp-dimensions.jpg
 
Many curb ramps are done without the wings as just a straight shot with a tapered "step" along the edges.
I would not have any problem with the lid or pole in the flat section adjacent to the ramp section in this arrangement.
 
A lot of people trip and fall on the curbs created without the flares.
you have that drop off...

Even with flares this is dangerous, who was the rocket scientist on this one...
video.jpg
 
Grooves are no longer allowed in CA.
Actually it would be better if the flare slope was decreased to <5% to minimize tripping and better assist WC's except the flair may cause an imbalance to a chair when initially transitioning from the flat to the slope.
 
Good question. We have several in our city that have been redone over the last year or so and they look just like the one you posted or even back up to the 6" and down again for the other direction. Seems to me would make more sense to keep the whole area lowered to prevent tripping or bouncing a tire off of it.:confused:


A lot of people trip and fall on the curbs created without the flares.
you have that drop off...

Even with flares this is dangerous, who was the rocket scientist on this one...
video.jpg
 
Grooves are no longer allowed in CA.

I believe that 11B/ADA 302.3 allows for max 1/2" wide grooves or even openings on accessible ground surfaces.

upload_2019-9-10_12-5-13.png

In fact, for privately funded housing accessibility (CBC 11A), the grooves are actually still required per CBC Fig. 11A-3K :
upload_2019-9-10_12-7-40.png


upload_2019-9-10_12-2-0.png
 

Attachments

  • upload_2019-9-10_12-7-24.png
    upload_2019-9-10_12-7-24.png
    42.5 KB · Views: 1
Grooves are less hazardous than the truncated domes when there is snow and ice on the ground.
You cannot shovel a truncated dome clean to achieve a non slip surface.
 
Grooves are no longer allowed in CA.
Actually it would be better if the flare slope was decreased to <5% to minimize tripping and better assist WC's except the flair may cause an imbalance to a chair when initially transitioning from the flat to the slope.
Grooves are no longer Required in CA 11B. They are not prohibited.
BUT are still in CA 11A
CA 1112A.8 Border
All curb ramps shall have a grooved border 12 inches (305 mm) wide at the level surface of the sidewalk along the top and each side approximately 3/4 inch (19 mm) on center. All curb ramps constructed between the face of the curb and the street shall have a grooved border at the level surface of the sidewalk. See Figures 11A-3A through 11A-3K.
 
Last edited:
Grooves are less hazardous than the truncated domes when there is snow and ice on the ground.
You cannot shovel a truncated dome clean to achieve a non slip surface.
But the grooves do not work as well as the truncated domes for the blind.
 
But the grooves do not work as well as the truncated domes for the blind.
I agree the truncated domes work better for the blind. Then "there’s Murphy’s Law type unanticipated consequences: “What Can Go Wrong, Will Go Wrong”; and there are perverse effects that result in the opposite of what was intended. "

Slip and falls by perfectly able bodied people due to minimal surface contact between the surface of the shoe and the ground when the truncated domes are wet or snow and ice builds up between the dome areas.
I have slipped on them and I am aware of how slippery they can be.
 
What you show is not CBC 11B 2016 ?

Everything I showed in post #9 is CBC 11B 2016. There is nothing in there that prohibits grooves, or even openings per 2016 CBC Fig 11B-302.3.
If you have something different in your copy of CBC 2016, please repost the exact language and specific reference from the 2016 CBC. Thanks!
 
Top