• 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.

Cross Slope

bill1952 said:
Do these both serve the same place, and connect via an accessible route?


How many separate means of egress are required? Just one of these?
Click to expand...
It's a small building housing Men and Women toilets for a community park. Only 1 entrance / exit to each restroom. The exterior walkway connects to a pedestrian area on the north and south.
 
Well seems both sides need to be accessible by practically any code: ADA or IBC/ICC A117.1.

Just looking ahead, I think in 2027 IBC, maybe already in California and Ohio codes, this kind of facility in a government entity owned park will be required to have an adult changing station? Have hashed through details of that in ICC A117.1 committee over last several years. Just a PSA.
 
Yep, that's what I thought. And just to be clear, you agree that an accessible set up steps does not comply? Must be 2 ramps?
 
What are
Phil B said:
accessible set up steps
Click to expand...
? Not a term I know.

What is center door? The entrance to both restrooms? And it can't serve as the egress? Sorry, not grasping the entire plan.

(I'm avoiding the possibility they could both be all gender.)
 
bill1952 said:
What are

? Not a term I know.

What is center door? The entrance to both restrooms? And it can't serve as the egress? Sorry, not grasping the entire plan.

(I'm avoiding the possibility they could both be all gender.)
Click to expand...
Typo. I just meant 'accessible steps'. Center door is to a separate family restroom.
 
Since those three doors are so close together, I'm fairly certain they don't qualify as "remote," and therefore they collectively only add up to one means of egress.

Hmmm ... that's badly phrased. Each door is an exit, but they don't qualify as "remote" and therefore additional remote exits are required regardless of the capacity of these three doors.
 
I don't grasp floor plan but I imagine one door leads to a women's toilet room, one to a family restroom, and one to a men's toilet room. And these spaces don't connect within the building. Thus I think all three rooms and doors to them must be accessible. I don't think but don't know if the only the family room was accessible, would that be acceptable.
 
bill1952 said:
I don't grasp floor plan but I imagine one door leads to a women's toilet room, one to a family restroom, and one to a men's toilet room. And these spaces don't connect within the building. Thus I think all three rooms and doors to them must be accessible. I don't think but don't know if the only the family room was accessible, would that be acceptable.
Click to expand...

Hmmm ...

That's a very plausible possibility, but not one that even occurred to me. I was envisioning the building as either a single large tenant space, or perhaps multiple tenant spaces.

Another reason why people who want useful responses should provide as much pertinent information as possible.
 
Phil B said:
2%
Click to expand...
Not sure if you’re still considering sloping the area at the exterior door landing, but if the 2% slopes perpendicular to the door then I’d be curious to know how the door threshold would be handled, assuming a 3’ wide door at 2% that would be Rise = Slope x Run = 0.02 x 36” = 0.72” across the width of the door. You’d have the height of the door threshold itself then the fall due to the 2% slope, changes in elevation greater than 0.50” have to be ramped per A117.1-2021 303.4.

TBCF 250525 cross slope 02.png
 
@Yankee Chronicler Post 25:
Phil B said:
It's a small building housing Men and Women toilets for a community park. Only 1 entrance / exit to each restroom. The exterior walkway connects to a pedestrian area on the north and south.
Click to expand...
Do you think it just the family restroom was accessible it would be code compliant? A reasonable accomodation given it's an existing building?
 
Oops! I completely missed that.

Under the ICC system, A117.1 only provides the technical requirements. Scoping comes from the IBC. This is in Chapter 11:

1110.2 Toilet and bathing facilities. Each toilet room and
bathing room shall be accessible. Where a floor level is not
required to be connected by an accessible route, the only toilet
rooms or bathing rooms provided within the facility shall not
be located on the inaccessible floor. Except as provided for in
Sections 1110.2.4 and 1110.2.5, at least one of each type of
fixture, element, control or dispenser in each accessible toilet
room and bathing room shall be accessible.
Click to expand...

There are several exceptions, but I don't see one to allow a single-occupant unisex toilet room to cancel the requirement for the standard toilet rooms to be accessible. I thought my home state had added such an exception by state amendment, but now that I'm looking for it, I don't see it.
 
Phil B said:
Am I incorrect in assuming that both means of access / egress need to ramped? Would steps for one of the ways in and out on the exterior walkway be compliant? I am always confused by that, i.e., I've heard / read that 50% compliant is allowable.

View attachment 15691
Click to expand...
60% of entrances need to be accessible. You have three here, so at least two that are of the three serving the same business would need to be accessible.
I it appears to me; steps could be used as long as they are not interfering with the rest of the accessible routes to the buildings' other entrances or parking areas.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top