Can an accessible route from to building entrance occur in the middle of a driveway?

[Yikes]

Could a building / site comply with code and have its accessible path-of-travel to/from the public right of way go right up the middle of the driveway? I have a client with a very narrow lot. It's only wide enough for the parking and the drive aisle, with the building entrance towards the rear of the parking lot.

Assume for the moment that the driveway path would meet all other requirements for accessible slope, cross-slope, etc. down the middle of the driveway. The only issue is that there is no dedicated, separate walkway for pedestrian entry. The accessible path from the street is shared by cars, pedestrians, and wheelchair users. (FWIW, the facility is a self-storage building, and pedestrian use is very rare.)

I understand that ADA CBC 11B-502.7 does not allow accessible parking stalls to have a path-of travel behind other parked cars. We've created accessible stall(s) right next to the building entrance that fully comply, so that's not the issue.

The only question is whether wheelchair users can go to/from the street and the building entrance while sharing the drive aisle with cars.

Any code problems with this?

 

[ICE]

Might be a ramp. Up the middle of the driveway you say. Odd place for handrails.

 

[Frank]

That is typical here

 

[jdfruit]

Yikes, here is the CBC section that could be an over riding requirement for PoT to public way (hope I have properly interpreted your OP)

11B-247.1.2.5 Hazardous vehicular areas. If a walk crosses or adjoins a vehicular way, and the walking surfaces are not separated by curbs, railings or other elements between the pedestrian areas and vehicular areas, the boundary between the areas shall be defined by a continuous detectable warning complying with Sections 11B-705.1.1 and 11B-705.1.2.5.

 

[north star]

& = &

" ...and the walking surfaces are not separated by curbs, railings or other elements"

Could those "other elements" be something as simple aspainted lines, similar to Crosswalks type of pavement marking ?

& = &

 

[steveray]

I do not believe it is flat out prohibited....there is no max travel in a vehicular way that I am aware of, crossing street, parking lot, driveway, etc....

 

[ADAguy]

NS, last I checked, paint is not "detectable" to a cane or non-cane user.

 

[Yikes]

So, this would be code compliant:

I come out of the building main entrance/exit,

cross a detectable warning,

go down the middle of the driveway on a path that is painted / striped / indicated for the path in the driveway that complies with all slope, cross-slope, etc. requirements,

cross another detectable warning,

and end on the public sidewalk.

Complies for both going and coming to the building, correct?

ADA guy: The code does not require me to tactile label the entire pathway from building to ROW. It only requires me to provide a tactile warning strip when the path is leading into / out of vehicular areas. I might have to put tactile warning across the entire building front entrance, like they do at our local Target store. Is that correct?

 

[JBI]

So the wheelchair user that probably crossed multiple intersections to arrive at the site will somehow be endangered wheeling up the driveway? I'm not seeing it.

Put the detectables at the top and bottom.

 

[mark handler]

ADASAD 2010 Advisory 502.3 Access Aisle.*Accessible routes must connect parking spaces to accessible entrances. In parking facilities where the accessible route must cross vehicular traffic lanes, marked crossings enhance pedestrian safety, particularly for people using wheelchairs and other mobility aids. Where possible, it is preferable that the accessible route not pass behind parked vehicles.

CBC 11B-247.1.2.5 and CBC 11B-705.1.2.5

At any walk entering or adjoining vehicular ways without curb, railing, or barrier separation, Shall have a continuous detectable warning strip per item 22 with 36-inch (absolute) depth for entire length/width of transition.

 

[mark handler]

NOT the right thing to do, this designer does not have a clue

 

[JPohling]

looks like some kind of food offering for a snow plow

 

[mark handler]

looks like some kind of food offering for a snow plow

In San Diego?

 

[ADAguy]

MH, thank you but: no TD's on curb ramp (smiling)?

Would it be "Best Practice" or required to paint "No Parking" in striped area?

 

[mark handler]

MH, thank you but: no TD's on curb ramp (smiling)?Would it be "Best Practice" or required to paint "No Parking" in striped area?

I am not saying that is the way to do it BUT the first picture does comply with the code section for seperation, yes DW's are req. on the ramp.

 

[Yikes]

Mark, thanks for supplying the photo. However, I would disagree with their solution in the first photo for at least two reasons:

1. The warning strip should have been continuous for the TRANSITION. In this case, continuous only across the bottom of the curb ramp.

2. They way they've done it would give a vision-impaired person a false sense of safety: "If I stay inside of the detectable bumps, must be out of the flow of traffic." It appears to me that cars could still drive over the blue striped area on the inside / "safe" side of the detectable warning.

The second photo also gives this false impression. It implies that once you've crossed the aisle (moving towards the camera), you are now out of traffic. That does not appear to be the case, unless there are some bollards out of view to the right to block the cars.

 

[ADAguy]

Yikes, onsite stripping for crosswalks is not required/regulated but is good risk-management practice.

 

[MASSDRIVER]

Does that come with a dental plan?

Brent.

 

[Yikes]

UPDATE: Here's the proposed code change for 2016:

http://www.documents.dgs.ca.gov/dsa/access/2016-Pt2_Draft-Changes-4th-Public-Hearing_06-23-2015.pdf

"11B-247.1.2.5 Walks at vehicular areas. If Where a walk crosses a

vehicular way or adjoins a vehicular way area, and the walk is not separated

from the vehicular way or vehicular area by curbs, railings or other elements, the boundary between the walk and vehicular way or the

walk and vehicular area shall be defined by a continuous detectable warning complying with

Sections 11B-705.1.1 and 11B-705.1.2.5 placed on the walk. Detectable warnings are not

required on the walk at opposite sides of a driveway apron."

REASON: DSA-AC is proposing an amendment to this section to clarify the terminology in the code as it

relates to the placement of detectable warning surfaces for walks at vehicular areas. As this section is

currently written, the term “hazardous vehicular area” is applied based on what the user determines to be

“hazardous”, and not based on a specific setting as defined in the code. As a result, incorrect placement

of detectable warning surfaces is common in many facilities, where incorrect placement of detectable

warning surfaces provides no benefit to a visually impaired user. This is evident in parking lots where

detectable warning surfaces are placed at the end of accessible parking access aisles, some of which are

adjacent to crosswalks and marked pedestrian ways, and all of which are components of a vehicular area.

Furthermore, detectable warning surfaces in accessible parking access aisles restricts use of the access

aisle for a user with mobility impairments, while providing no benefit to an individual with vision

impairments, who is escorted with assistance from accessible parking areas to the areas of the facility that

can be navigated independently. Amendment to this section will provide specificity for the placement of

detectable warning surfaces for walks at vehicular areas.

 

[ADAguy]

Thank you for the heads up but what of sight impaired individuals who are unescorted or use canes?

 

[amsfife]

I'm in a similar situation

Can you have the path of travel from building entrance to the right of way share space with a driveway, or be along side of the driveway, but not be separated by a curb?

 

[ADAguy]

This a typical condition found and allowed in conversions of existing gas station service bays to minimarts who don't have direct connections to the public way. Same with rear stairs dumping into alleys.

 

[Mr. Inspector]

Don't know CA codes but 2015 IBC has this:
Exception: Other than in buildings or facilities containing or serving type B units, an accessible route shall not be required between site arrival points and the building or facility entrance if the only means of access between them is a vehicular way not providing for pedestrian access.

If it wasn't for the exception a lot of camps back in the woods would have problems.

 

[ADAguy]

example of ICC not complying w/ ADASAD