• 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

ADAAG Detectable warnings

mark handler

mark handler

SAWHORSE
Joined
Oct 25, 2009
Messages
11,709
Location
So. CA
The revised ADA guidelines only require detectable warnings (truncated domes) at transit platform edges.

Detectable warnings for curb ramps, hazardous vehicular areas, and reflecting pools are not covered in the New ADAAG.

The Access Board plans to add the detectable warning requirements (new truncated dome design) to future "right-of-way" guidelines currently being developed.

The current ADAAG requires the use of detectable warnings in various locations such as curb ramps.

They are still, and will still be required, by some state codes, regardless of FED requirements
 
I just spent the moring cleaning out my emails and have already deleted the response I got from the Access Board on the deletion of the domes at curb ramps. If I recall they said that the Department of Transportion addresses them now. However, the ICC/ANSI A117.1 still requires them at curb ramps.
 
Examiner said:
I just spent the moring cleaning out my emails and have already deleted the response I got from the Access Board on the deletion of the domes at curb ramps. If I recall they said that the Department of Transportion addresses them now. However, the ICC/ANSI A117.1 still requires them at curb ramps.
Click to expand...
With that logic, they should delete all the ADA Architectural Guidelines, since they are all covered in other Standards and codes.... That will eliminate 98 percent of the conflics
 
Sorry, Examiner, the ICC/ANSI A117.1 does NOT require them at curb ramps. Look harder. The 2003 only requires them at boarding platforms.

The federal DOT will mandate truncated domes at federal highway crossings and many local jurisdictions have them in their local (or state) standards. The future ROW guidelines are definitely a future plan.

My suggestion is to follow what is already in the ROW draft. There is no prohibition on the truncated domes in the current regs so there would be no violation from that standpoint. On the note of where to put them. I disagree with California's position (i.e. "everywhere!"). The intent was to indicate a condition where vehicles could not stop in time if a person with a vision disability accidentally maneuvered into the vehicular path. that is why the ADAAG uses the term hazardous vehicular path. In parking lots and parking garages, the speed is usually so slow that the vehicular path is not "hazardous" in this manner. However, at street intersections, the term certainly applies. Thus, inside the project site, it may or may not be necessary to use the detectable warning pad. At public streets, it should be in place.
 
ICC/ANSI A117.1-2003 as referenced in the 2006 IBC.

Section 406 CURB RAMPS

Sub-Section 406.12, 406.13 and 406.14

406.13 Detectable Warnings at Curb Ramps.

Where detectable warnings are provided on curb ramps, they shall comply with Sections 406.13 and 705.

Of course it does state “Where detectable warnings are provided….”

Do you mean that it now is a choice to provide or not?
 
Examiner said:
ICC/ANSI A117.1-2003 as referenced in the 2006 IBC.Section 406 CURB RAMPS

Sub-Section 406.12, 406.13 and 406.14

406.13 Detectable Warnings at Curb Ramps.

Where detectable warnings are provided on curb ramps, they shall comply with Sections 406.13 and 705.

Of course it does state “Where detectable warnings are provided….”

Do you mean that it now is a choice to provide or not?
Click to expand...
Exactly!

It is now an option - no longer a mandate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top