Historical exemption

[tbz]

Here is my question on ADA/ABA exemptions for historical reasons?

Historical building, had a style of handrail when first built I believe, then other handrails, now building and installing historical replicates of the original handrail which are not compliant for the 4" - 6.25" circumference.

If the building has other accessibility access even though this is the main entrance is this allowed>

Mark, looking for input...

 

[brudgers]

My opinion, no, because it is a new handrail there is no technical infeasibility and because it is a new handrail not an historical one there is no preservation issue which necessitates the particular selection of railings.

 

[tbz]

brudgers,

Thanks that is what I believe also, since the handrails were not existing, but new recreations, the exemption is not allowed?

If the handrails were existing and we were just restoring the existing handrail, then that would be different correct?

 

[brudgers]

brudgers, Thanks that is what I believe also, since the handrails were not existing, but new recreations, the exemption is not allowed? If the handrails were existing and we were just restoring the existing handrail, then that would be different correct?

Allowed? Well that's the call in question. It would in part depend on the listing for the building - and in most cases I wouldn't see why reproduction is necessary. On the other hand if the listing is for "the fine oak finish carpentry" then there might be some more weight given to the choice or if there are stairs elsewhere in the building which retain the original profile.

 

[Frank]

How is the building being used?

How much public exposure to the handrails is there?

Is the building being displayed for its historical significance and as an example of a type of architecture or because of who lived there or what meetings were held there?

For display buildings the restoration of the building character as a whole would lead to wanting to use period style handrails

Or is it being used for more ordinary purposes?

Buildings that are being adapted to more modern uses often just keeping a facade to remember the historic character of the neighborhood would not need as much leeway.

 

[mark handler]

§36.405 Alterations: Historic preservation.

(a) Alterations to buildings or facilities that are eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places under the National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.) or are designated as historic under State or local law, shall comply to the maximum extent feasible with this part.

(b) If it is determined that it is not feasible to provide physical access to an historic property that is a place of public accommodation in a manner that will not threaten or destroy the historic significance of the building or the facility, alternative methods of access shall be provided pursuant to the requirements of subpart C of this part.

Alterations to historic properties shall comply, to the maximum extent feasible, with the provisions applicable to historic properties in the design standards specified in § 35.151©.

If it is not feasible to provide physical access to an historic property in a manner that will not threaten or destroy the historic significance of the building or facility, alternative methods of access shall be provided pursuant to the requirements of § 35.150.

 

[tbz]

Okay,Some more context, which I should have posted in the first place.The only thing that could be a problem is that the post mountings might be limited to 3 because of the stair structure and larger support channels for spans,Mark, the only thing non-compliant is the 6.25" cir....I hope the picture comes up, something different with the picture link, not working like normal. Tom

View attachment 464

View attachment 464

/monthly_2011_07/hcch-hr.jpg.dcf66ba69d381c200d171cfa15cb6cb6.jpg

 

[mark handler]

Can you mount a compliant rail to the existing

A 6.25 inch rail is not safe for anyone

 

[Msradell]

It also doesn't appear that changing those railings to a compliant size would significantly affect the historic image of the building. This would be another point against having them being non compliant.

 

[tbz]

Can you mount a compliant rail to the existingA 6.25 inch rail is not safe for anyone

Mark,

The issue is the (3) support post span, adding more posts is not viable due to the stone works make up and support below.

Thus making the spans with the molding and bottom support becomes an issue.

Frank How is the building being used?

How much public exposure to the handrails is there?

Is the building being displayed for its historical significance and as an example of a type of architecture or because of who lived there or what meetings were held there?

For display buildings the restoration of the building character as a whole would lead to wanting to use period style handrails

Or is it being used for more ordinary purposes?

Buildings that are being adapted to more modern uses often just keeping a facade to remember the historic character of the neighborhood would not need as much leeway.

This is the main entrance to the county sup. court house......

I am posting the handrail profile cut views showing sizing options.

The left detail above is the requested design, the one to the right is shown with 1" leg channels and is still over the 6.25.

The next 2 below comply with the 6.25" perimeter however concerns arise about strength

These 2 details comply with the 6.25" perimeter

 

[Frank]

Given those details they should go with a compliant cross section There would be minimal historical impact and there is a large public exposure

 

[mark handler]

You are right two of the profiles do comply with the Non-Circular Cross Section portion of the standards. Handrail gripping surfaces with a non-circular cross section shall have a perimeter dimension of 4 inches minimum and 6 1/4 inches maximum, and a cross-section dimension of 2 1/4 inches maximum.

But if they do not comply with building code strength requirements, add to the interior of the profile, or add supports, don't increase the profile size.

 

[brudgers]

You are right two of the profiles do comply with the Non-Circular Cross Section portion of the standards. Handrail gripping surfaces with a non-circular cross section shall have a perimeter dimension of 4 inches minimum and 6 1/4 inches maximum, and a cross-section dimension of 2 1/4 inches maximum. But if they do not comply with building code strength requirements, add to the interior of the profile, or add supports, don't increase the profile size.

Or use a different material.