Ramp Requirement for Restaurant Back of House in an Existing Building

[dmoreholt]

Hello,

I have a client who wants to convert an existing building into a restaurant. But a portion of the back of the building, about 1,000 sf, is about 2' lower than the rest. This portion would be entirely restaurant back of house and used for storage and walk in coolers. The rest of the back of house, where the kitchen is, will be closer to the front and is at the higher level of the rest of the building.

Do we need to build an internal ADA compliant ramp for staff to access the lower portion? This area is well above the 300 sf exempted for employee work areas, but this is an existing building. Along with improving the bathrooms to be ADA compliant and adding a ramp in the front for patrons I don't think a ramp for this rear portion would take us over the 20% threshold for improvements to existing buildings. However it does significantly reduce the usable square footage for the back of house.

A preferable option, which could also be added later if allowed, would be to add a ramp on the exterior, which works well for us since there's already two doors out the side at both the higher and lower level that are far enough apart that a ramp could be installed in between.

 

[steveray]

Is it technically infeasible?

306.7 Alterations.
P​

A facility that is altered shall comply with the applicable provisions in Chapter 11 of the International Building Code, ICC A117.1 and the provisions of Sections 306.7.1 through 306.7.16, unless technically infeasible. Where compliance with this section is technically infeasible, the alteration shall provide access to the maximum extent technically feasible.

 

[Mr. Inspector]

I don't know the ADA, just IBC ch. 11 for accessibility. In PA plan reviewers are not allowed to decide if something is technically feasible. Get more expensive accessible door hardware like gold plated ones to get your 20% or labor that charges more.

 

[dmoreholt]

Thanks Steveray, it is technically feasible, so it sounds like there isn't an exception that allows us to avoid the ramp. What about a ramp on the exterior to negotiate the grade change? I know there's language that says accessibility features can't give unequal access to handicapped individuals so making them go outside to negotiate the grade change might not be acceptable?

I should also note that both the lower and higher potions of the building have at grade entrances so we can meet egress requirements for both areas without the internal ramp.

I understand the plan reviewers may not catch this, in many municipalities they don't even review for ADA/A117.1 compliance. But as the Architect of Record I have a professional obligation to meet accessibility codes and of course am opening myself and the owner to liability if we don't do so.

 

[steveray]

so making them go outside to negotiate the grade change might not be acceptable?

Correct....Without seeing a plan it is difficult to give better guidance....

 

[dmoreholt]

Thanks Steveray, I think we will need an internal ramp since there's plenty of space for it. But I've attached a demo plan here so you can take a look.

The rear portion separated by a wall 38'-8" from the back wall is the lower portion. The separation between the front of house and back of house is at the wall 40'-4" from the front.

 

[Yikes]

dmoeholt, it says you are form Maryland. Is that also where the building is located? What is the applicable code where the building is located?

 

[Yankee Chronicler]

Maryland has adopted the 2021 International Existing Building Code, but they deleted section 306 on accessibility and substituted the following:

Section 306​

COMAR 09.12.53 shall be referenced for minimum requirements in providing accessibility and usability of buildings and facilities by individuals with disabilities.

So you need to START your code path by looking at COMAR 09.12.53.

 

[tbz]

So if you can make the ramp work on the outside of the building, and from your explanation sounds like you exit turn 90 deg. then down ramp and then turn 90 deg back in, so why not just enclose that area to be part of the interior?

 

[dmoreholt]

dmoeholt, it says you are form Maryland. Is that also where the building is located? What is the applicable code where the building is located?

Yes, the governing municipality is Anne Arundel county MD, and they have adopted the 2021 ICC codes.

 

[dmoreholt]

So if you can make the ramp work on the outside of the building, and from your explanation sounds like you exit turn 90 deg. then down ramp and then turn 90 deg back in, so why not just enclose that area to be part of the interior?

Yes, that's what we'll do if we need a ramp. But if it's not required then we won't put one in and the owner will have more space to use for the restaurant.

 

[dmoreholt]

Maryland has adopted the 2021 International Existing Building Code, but they deleted section 306 on accessibility and substituted the following:



So you need to START your code path by looking at COMAR 09.12.53.

Thanks, looks like that's Maryland's accessibility code. It's quite short

Here's all I could find that seemed relevant:

A. There is also federal law governing many of the buildings and facilities covered by this Code, and to the extent federal law is more restrictive than this Code, federal law shall control. Federal law also governs some buildings and facilities which are not covered by this Code. For instance, the Americans with Disabilities Act requires owners of existing buildings to make changes that are "readily achievable to accommodate individuals with disabilities".B. The Department has no authority to interpret federal law. When this Code is parallel with federal law, the Department may only interpret the Code as State law and its interpretations are not binding interpretations of the concurrent federal law.
Md. Code Regs. 09.12.53.04

“(b) For alterations to an existing nonresidential building with a second story that has a gross floor area between 4,000 square feet and 8,000 square feet, existing accessibility to the second story shall be maintained;”
Md. Code Regs. 09.12.53.07

Could this area be considered a 'second story' and thus not require accessibility improvements?

Also, Section 1104.4 of IBC states that "An accessible route is not required to stories, mezzanines and occupied roofs that have an aggregate area of not more than 3,000 square feet (278.7 m2) and are located above and below accessible levels." Since this area is under 3,000sf wouldn't that apply?

Another question, do the state versions of codes apply to all municipalities of the state? Like, if a county's website says they follow 2018 IBC does that always mean the MD version if they're in that state?

 

[Yankee Chronicler]

Could this area be considered a 'second story' and thus not require accessibility improvements?

No.

Also, Section 1104.4 of IBC states that "An accessible route is not required to stories, mezzanines and occupied roofs that have an aggregate area of not more than 3,000 square feet (278.7 m2) and are located above and below accessible levels." Since this area is under 3,000sf wouldn't that apply?

No. It's not a separate story, it's not a mezzanine, and it's clearly not an occupied roof.

 

[jar546]

But as the Architect of Record I have a professional obligation to meet accessibility codes and of course am opening myself and the owner to liability if we don't do so.

This is the attitude more RDPs need to have. Kudos to you.

 

[mark handler]

IMPO
If the ramp is achievable, it is required.
Even if it is just for employees. Employee paths of travel are required to be accessible, per 2010 ADASAD.
Yes, you as the designer, could be, part of the Lawsuit.

 

[mtlogcabin]

Do yo have the ceiling height to raise the floor using GEOFOAM and pour a lightweight concrete slab on top? Then raise your rear exit door and provide a ramp on the outside of the building for ease of deliveries, not accessibility.
Existing buildings are not required two accessible exits and the public can't exit through the kitchen so the accessible means of egress is back through the entrance. A level floor would be a lot better for the employees versus changing elevation multiple times throughout the day.

 

[dmoreholt]

Thanks everyone, based on the feedback given and codes referenced it looks like we need that ramp. I appreciate the help.

 

[dmoreholt]

Do yo have the ceiling height to raise the floor using GEOFOAM and pour a lightweight concrete slab on top? Then raise your rear exit door and provide a ramp on the outside of the building for ease of deliveries, not accessibility.
Existing buildings are not required two accessible exits and the public can't exit through the kitchen so the accessible means of egress is back through the entrance. A level floor would be a lot better for the employees versus changing elevation multiple times throughout the day.

That's an interesting idea and I'll share it with the owner. I have a feeling the cost of doing that over the whole space will be more than constructing the ramp. And the building is larger than the tenant needs and we will also have a stair so there is a not a big need to get the two floor level.

 

[ICE]

We have become a nation of pansies. Roll the dice and scrap the ramp.

 

[Joe.B]

I see a lot of restaurant employees moving stuff around with hand trucks. I bet they'll like the ramp...

 

[dmoreholt]

We have become a nation of pansies. Roll the dice and scrap the ramp.

That's really not the right attitude for a professional that has an obligation to the safety and welfare of the public.

Honestly, I have no concerns about liability. I see ADA violations all the time that will never be reported and I seriously doubt anyone would catch this.

But I do take my responsibility to correctly interpret and apply Building Codes and Accessibility codes very seriously.

Surprised to see a comment like this from someone who moderates a forum dedicated to life safety codes.

 

[Mr. Inspector]

When they write down what they are spending towards the 20% how do you know that it is correct? I never know how much they are really spending. I have them write down what they are spending towards the 20%, that's all I need. They can say they are spending $1,000 on a new door closer because the old one can't be adjusted right. I don't know if they even did this because I did not see the old one. It's not my job to audit their expenses. Does anyone ever?

 

[Joe.B]

Surprised to see a comment like this from someone who moderates a forum dedicated to life safety codes.

Stick around, it will stop surprising you. He's a special case I'd be surprised if he was less than 50% serious....

One thing I have to remind myself is that a lot of communication is lost when the media is text only. I intended my last comment there to be snarky and sarcastic, but it could be read many different ways...

 

[mtlogcabin]

we will also have a stair so there is a not a big need to get the two floor level.

Play the devil's advocate with the owner, How many people and how many trips in a day will going up and down those stairs carrying what and how much does it weigh, Now a few fall down the stairs worker comp claims and the resulting increase in premiums plus when the injured party sues the owner might as well just hand over the keys to his investment and hard work.