Private-to-public sidewalk connection on a steep street.

[Yikes]

11B/ADA requires me to provide an accessible path of travel to a public right-of-way. I can connect my path to the public sidewalk, but the public sidewalk itself has a 7% main slope and a 1.5% cross slope. I can't see any scenario in which it is physically possible for a wheelchair to turn from private land and enter the 7% sloping public sidewalk without either violating a 5% maximum main slope or a 2% maximum cross-slope.

By way of analogy, here's how it's done with driveway aprons, but they are allowed to warp their transition at greater than 5% main / 2% cross slope:



What do you do when it's not a driveway, but a wheelchair path?


This place (below) just warped the private/public transition at greater than 2% - - I guess they just assumed it was the best they could do.

 

[Msradell]

Unfortunately, it looks like that's about all you can do in a situation like that. Certainly not ideal but given that the municipal sidewalk exceeds the standards it would certainly be difficult for you to meet.

 

[steveray]

I know it is semantics but....Your path is TO the PW...Then it sucks...

 

[Mr. Inspector]

I see this a lot of this in a town I inspect that calls itself the Switzerland of America, They also have some public stairways connecting Neighborhoods. It gave me second thoughts when I had to inspect a store that had to have their accessible entrance off an intermediate landing on one of these public stairways. The stairway is a public way.

 

[tbz]

I understand that accessibility is what we want, but the last time I checked didn't Columbus show us that the world is not flat, and perfection in the accessibility community is a flat world, sometimes reality is just that!

 

[Yikes]

I know it is semantics but....Your path is TO the PW...Then it sucks...

I hear you… but the word “TO” means that it must be accessible (max 2% cross slope) until it touches the property line… which would force me to have a lip / trip hazard right on the property line junction with the public sidewalk.

 

[mark handler]

Is there another location where you can achieve the 11B-406.5.7 Cross Slope, requirement?

If not, then it is technically infeasible.
The details of the finding that full compliance with the requirements is technically infeasible shall be recorded and entered into the files of the enforcing agency.
11B-202.3

 

[Yikes]

Is there another location where you can achieve the 11B-406.5.7 Cross Slope, requirement?

If not, then it is technically infeasible.
The details of the finding that full compliance with the requirements is technically infeasible shall be recorded and entered into the files of the enforcing agency.
11B-202.3

This particular location has an access easement from an adjacent shopping center. That shopping center has its pedestrian walkway entry near a street corner where the public sidewalk levels off, and that entry complies.
The only possible path of travel from that remote site entry to the subject building is down the middle of a drive aisle for hundreds of feet.

CBC 11B-502.7.1 for accessible parking does not allow for travel from an accessible stall behind other parked cars. Many people (including plan checkers) assume that this same code section therefore also prohibits the POT from the city sidewalk from travelling behind parked cars, but that is not the case. However, the same danger (of a wheelchair user being run over by someone backing out of a parking spot) exists whether that user originated from a public sidewalk, or from a parking stall.

So on a practical basis, I don't think we can rely on this path. I would rather claim technical infeasibility that to send wheelchair users down a drive aisle for hundreds of feet behind parked cars on an adjacent property.

 

[Mr. Inspector]

CBC 11B-502.7.1 for accessible parking does not allow for travel from an accessible stall behind other parked cars. Many people (including plan checkers) assume that this same code section therefore also prohibits the POT from the city sidewalk from travelling behind parked cars, but that is not the case. However, the same danger (of a wheelchair user being run over by someone backing out of a parking spot) exists whether that user originated from a public sidewalk, or from a parking stall.

How do you know if they will just pull in the parking lot or if they will back into it?

 

[Msradell]

How do you know if they will just pull in the parking lot or if they will back into it?

You obviously don't but the worst case of burial would be them backing out of the parking spot which is why I'm sure he stated it that way.

 

[Mr. Inspector]

Couldn't they have a sign that says "back in parking spaces only"? It's safer to back in anyway.

 

[Yikes]

Couldn't they have a sign that says "back in parking spaces only"? It's safer to back in anyway.

The shopping center has a supermarket. There's no way the supermarket will agree to back-in-only spaces there, because their customers typically load the groceries at the back end of the car.

 

[Msradell]

Couldn't they have a sign that says "back in parking spaces only"? It's safer to back in anyway.

What makes you think that drivers will respect what the sign says? I don't respect many other signs/in every respect that one. They are going to do what's the most convenient for them.