• 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

ADA Issue? - New legal twist?

indyarchyguy

Registered User
Joined
Mar 28, 2013
Messages
127
Location
United States
So one of my clients (a major mall developer), has been asked a question from one of their tenants. The tenant was approached by an attorney indicating their store entrance was out of compliance with Title III. The issue he was referring to was that the lock for the pair of entry doors (the lock is located on the interior side of the store, not in the common area of the mall) was non-compliant due to the reach height of the lock being only 12-inches above the floor. Since we all know the reach range is 48 to 15-inches. I see the point but since this is so used throughout the country, I wanted to see if anyone could weigh in on this for me. The other part is they are saying having to turn the key is non-compliant as well (twisting and pinching). I thought the key element was something that was allowed since keys are basically what we use. I am all ears and always appreciate everyone's insight. Thank you!!
 
So one of my clients (a major mall developer), has been asked a question from one of their tenants. The tenant was approached by an attorney indicating their store entrance was out of compliance with Title III. The issue he was referring to was that the lock for the pair of entry doors (the lock is located on the interior side of the store, not in the common area of the mall) was non-compliant due to the reach height of the lock being only 12-inches above the floor. Since we all know the reach range is 48 to 15-inches. I see the point but since this is so used throughout the country, I wanted to see if anyone could weigh in on this for me. The other part is they are saying having to turn the key is non-compliant as well (twisting and pinching). I thought the key element was something that was allowed since keys are basically what we use. I am all ears and always appreciate everyone's insight. Thank you!!

Email the guru

I think she did an article on it


 
Wow, that's a troubling question. I don't know the answer but would start by looking at the door as an employee operated thing vs. a customer operated thing, assuming the door lock is only operated by employees.
 
Is this the type of door that is a roll-up grille with the lock near the floor? And that is only operable by employees? If so you might be able to argue that when the door is open the space is subject to Title III as a public accommodation but that when the door is closed it is subject to Title I for employment. Or, maybe you could argue that when the door is closed only the portions of Title III for Employee Work Areas apply, see ADA Standards for Accessible Design para. 203.9 which only requires a subset of the full standard, hopefully not including the reach range.
 
So one of my clients (a major mall developer), has been asked a question from one of their tenants. The tenant was approached by an attorney indicating their store entrance was out of compliance with Title III. The issue he was referring to was that the lock for the pair of entry doors (the lock is located on the interior side of the store, not in the common area of the mall) was non-compliant due to the reach height of the lock being only 12-inches above the floor. Since we all know the reach range is 48 to 15-inches. I see the point but since this is so used throughout the country, I wanted to see if anyone could weigh in on this for me. The other part is they are saying having to turn the key is non-compliant as well (twisting and pinching). I thought the key element was something that was allowed since keys are basically what we use. I am all ears and always appreciate everyone's insight. Thank you!!



 
In my opinion, since it is only operable by employees, I would think that it is not an issue until they have an employee that asks for reasonable accommodation. At which point, they are legally obligated to provide reasonable accommodation to that employee, so they would have to figure out a different solution. Until then, I don't think that it is an issue.

Not that my opinion would stand up in a court of law...
 
1010.1.9 Door operations. Except as specifically permitted
by this section, egress doors shall be readily openable
from the egress side without the use of a key or special
knowledge or effort.
1010.1.9.1 Hardware. Door handles, pulls, latches,
locks and other operating devices on doors required to
be accessible by Chapter 11 shall not require tight
grasping, tight pinching or twisting of the wrist to operate.
1010.1.9.2 Hardware height. Door handles, pulls,
latches, locks and other operating devices shall be
installed 34 inches (864 mm) minimum and 48 inches
(1219 mm) maximum above the finished floor. Locks
used only for security purposes and not used for normal
operation are permitted at any height.
 
I believe the OP questions is solely on the 2010ADA requirements, as thus quoting IBC sections does not help answer the question.

Indy, I would suggest getting some pictures and finding out exactly the use of the door or doors in question and contact technical support at the ACCESS-Board.gov website , or email them or call the info in the pic.
accessboard.JPG
This way you get a direct quote to provide to your client that they can respond properly to their client and then to the "well" the one that started this conversation happening.

I do it at least 4 times a year, and who wants to argue with the ones who write the model the DOJ adopts.
 
Is this the type of door that is a roll-up grille with the lock near the floor? And that is only operable by employees? If so you might be able to argue that when the door is open the space is subject to Title III as a public accommodation but that when the door is closed it is subject to Title I for employment. Or, maybe you could argue that when the door is closed only the portions of Title III for Employee Work Areas apply, see ADA Standards for Accessible Design para. 203.9 which only requires a subset of the full standard, hopefully not including the reach range.
No. This is for a pair of storefront doors. The active leaf is locked into the adjacent inactive leaf. Then then inactive leaf is unlocked for the total egress width.
 
1010.1.9 Door operations. Except as specifically permitted
by this section, egress doors shall be readily openable
from the egress side without the use of a key or special
knowledge or effort.
1010.1.9.1 Hardware. Door handles, pulls, latches,
locks and other operating devices on doors required to
be accessible by Chapter 11 shall not require tight
grasping, tight pinching or twisting of the wrist to operate.
1010.1.9.2 Hardware height. Door handles, pulls,
latches, locks and other operating devices shall be
installed 34 inches (864 mm) minimum and 48 inches
(1219 mm) maximum above the finished floor. Locks
used only for security purposes and not used for normal
operation are permitted at any height.
You rock Steveray!
 
Top