• Welcome to The Building Code Forum

    Your premier resource for building code knowledge.

    This forum remains free to the public thanks to the generous support of our Sawhorse Members and Corporate Sponsors. Their contributions help keep this community thriving and accessible.

    Want enhanced access to expert discussions and exclusive features? Learn more about the benefits here.

    Ready to upgrade? Log in and upgrade now.

2013 renovation, adding a bar

jar546

jar546

CBO
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Messages
13,014
Location
Not where I really want to be
An existing "A" use group is adding a newly constructed bar to the premises. If there is seating in the bar area that is ADA compliant, would any portion of the newly constructed bar have to be ADA accessible?

I think we may find 2 different anwers, 1 under federal ADA and 1 under ANSI

Chapter 12 of the 2012 IBC applies and the 2009 ANSI A117.1

What say thee?
 
Section 1109.12.3 - Point of sale and service counters, in the 2009 IBC & Ch. 2 -Scoping,

Section 201 - General, ..Ch. 3 - Building blocks (i.e. - maneurvering clearances at the

"new" bar) in the 2009 Edition of the ICC A117.1 Standard, to start with.

.
 
Assuming this is in reference to the beverage counter (bar) ADA (DOJ) has not officially ruled out equivalent accommodations as discussed elsewhere including this forum; http://www.thebuildingcodeforum.com/forum/accessibility/9059-new-construction-sales-service-counters-2.html

5.2 Counters and Bars. Where food or drink is served at counters exceeding 34 in (865 mm) in height for consumption by customers seated on stools or standing at the counter, a portion of the main counter which is 60 in (1525 mm) in length minimum shall be provided in compliance with 4.32 or service shall be available at accessible tables within the same area.

http://www.adaportal.org/Facility_Access/ADAAG/Special_Occupancies/ADAAG_5.html



IBC 1108.2.9.1 commentary; "The issue of whether a portion of a bar or dining counter in a restaurant is require to be accessible is subjective. The assumption is that if other types of seating are provided adjacent to the counter, then services provided at the counter will also be available at the adjacent seating; therefore, if adequate accessible seating is available adjacent to the bar area, the bar is not required to be lowered. If the bar is the only eating or dining surface in a restaurant or in a separate room in the restaurant, then a portion of the bar must be made accessible."



Francis



 
Well, I had no choice and I had to pull rank on one of our inspectors. The bar is in a dining area and within the bar area are accessible tables that get the same service as the bar,...therefore, the bar does not have to be accessible. I now have a happy contractor and an unhappy inspector which is a rare situation for me.
 
I do not agree. There should be accessible seating at the bar top. seating at a table is not the same as seating at the bar.
 
The counter needs an accessible portion

Accessible areas must be dispersed in all areas, that includes"bar" Dinning areas
 
From the 2009 Edition of the ICC A117.1 Standard, Section 103 = Compliance

Alternatives:

Nothing in this standard is intended to prevent the use of designs, products, or

technologies as alternatives to those prescribed by this standard, provided they

result in equivalent or greater accessibility and such equivalency is approved by

the administrative authority adopting this standard.

IMO, if the "new" bar add 10 seats, then 5% (or more) of those 10 seats would

need to be provided at other Dining tables in the existing Dining Areas.

If the bar owner cannot provide "equivalent or greater" accomodations at the

existing Dining tables, then accommodations would need to be addressed &

approved by the AHJ. The additional seats at the "new" bar would need to

be accounted for in the overall seating capabilities.



.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I bet that is a total waste of space. I doubt somebody using a wheel chair wants to sit in an area where his/her primary view is at butt level with those around him/her.
 
mtlogcabin said:
I bet that is a total waste of space. I doubt somebody using a wheel chair wants to sit in an area where his/her primary view is at butt level with those around him/her.
Click to expand...
Not for you to say
 
mark handler said:
Not for you to say
Click to expand...
Why not? It was JMHO on if the space would be used

Curious how many wheelchair users on this board will chime in with their personal opinion of using an accessible space at a bar.

do they use it or choose to sit elsewhere?
 
mtlogcabin said:
Why not? It was JMHO on if the space would be used Curious how many wheelchair users on this board will chime in with their personal opinion of using an accessible space at a bar.

do they use it or choose to sit elsewhere?
Click to expand...
That why the ADA was made into law, separate but equal is not equal.
 
I just required the 60" lowered portion on a twelve foot long bar in a bar /restuarant establishment. Calif is real specific in the raised bar seating requirement and the equivalent seating at a seperate table thing won't fly here. The owners weren't thrilled with the law but i don't make them! I just enforce them. They were really thrilled with the bicycle parking requirement:mrgreen:
 
There is nothing wrong with being separate and/or unequal. We are all individuals with individual abilities and limitations. We will never be equal in life. Does the ADA laws make life easier for some? Yes, should there a limit on the application? Yes there is never a one size fits all solution to anything.

I am not disagreeing with what the seating requirements for a bar area are, I am just curious if it is actually being used by those who it is provided for.
 
I now possess an email from the PA Dept of L&I concurring with our decision to allow the bar top as is providing the same level of service is provided in the bar area. Since L&I audits us and I now have this in my possession, I am feeling even better about my decision.

This, however means nothing as far as ADA under the federal DOJ is concerned and the RDP would be responsible for that since I have no jurisdiction over ADA, just ANSI A117.1 through the IBC chapter 11.

In other words. Not my problem. I hate to put it that way but that is the fact. If a patron wants to file a complaint with the DOJ then they may or may not have a case. Our auditors helped make this decision for us.
 
YOU maybe out of it but DOJ is still going after the violation

2013 SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

AND

MRS. K'S TOLL HOUSE RESTAURANT

Settlement Agreement Under the Americans with Disabilities Act between The United States of America and Mrs Ks Toll House Restaurant

The counter and bar exceeds 34" in height and no lowered portion is provided. Mrs. K's will provide an accessible lowered portion of the counter. 2010 Standards § 902.3

You might let the owner know.... it just takes one complaint, and it could cost them thousands to defend
 
mark handler said:
YOU maybe out of it but DOJ is still going after the violation2013 SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

AND

MRS. K'S TOLL HOUSE RESTAURANT

Settlement Agreement Under the Americans with Disabilities Act between The United States of America and Mrs Ks Toll House Restaurant

The counter and bar exceeds 34" in height and no lowered portion is provided. Mrs. K's will provide an accessible lowered portion of the counter. 2010 Standards § 902.3

You might let the owner know.... it just takes one complaint, and it could cost them thousands to defend
Click to expand...
I completely agree with you.
 
I have a similar stamp of my own

mark handler said:
The City of LOS ANGELES accessibility compliance planchecker use to stamp the drawing with a stamp that readPlans have been reviewed for CBC accessibility compliance.

Plans have not been reviewed for ADA accessibility

It ts the Owner's and designer's responsibility to comply with the

Americans with Disabilities Act
Click to expand...
Francis
 
This is on every permit as required by state law "Compliance with the requirements of the state building code for physical accessibility to persons with disabilities does not necessarily guarantee compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988, Title 49, chapter 2, commonly known as the Montana Human Rights Act or other similar federal, state or local laws that mandate accessibility to commercial construction or multifamily housing." Needs to be updated though
 
You need to enforce the codes and standards you are required to enforce

But many Building Officials/plan checkers do a disservice by trying to find ways not to comply with accessibility
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top