• Welcome to the new and improved Building Code Forum. We appreciate you being here and hope that you are getting the information that you need concerning all codes of the building trades. This is a free forum to the public due to the generosity of the Sawhorses, Corporate Supporters and Supporters who have upgraded their accounts. If you would like to have improved access to the forum please upgrade to Sawhorse by first logging in then clicking here: Upgrades

Trying to avoid an elevator

Mech

Registered User
Joined
Oct 30, 2009
Messages
1,036
Location
Eastern PA
2018 IBC & ADA

Two story existing building constructed in the side of a hill. Upper floor Mercantile space, lower floor storage / warehouse not open to the public. Upper floor has an accessible entrance on the North side. The lower floor could be provided with an accessible entrance on the south side. A proposed addition will enlarge the floor space such that the lower floor must have an accessible route from the upper floor.

If there are no stairs connecting the two floors, can I avoid an elevator? Employees could walk the 20 ft wide paved path (greater than 16% slope at some points) or drive this path from the upper floor parking lot to an accessible parking spot created for the lower level.

Everything I read in A117.1 and ADA appears to say no, I cannot do this.

However, can I use this section? Section 1104.5 Location. Accessible routes shall coincide with or be located in the same area as a general circulation path. Where the circulation path is interior, the accessible route shall be interior. Where only one accessible route is provided, the accessible route shall not pass through kitchens, storage rooms, restrooms, closets or similar spaces.

The 20 ft wide paved path is on this property, no sidewalks, not paint lines. The borough is granted a 14 ft easement, the water authority a 20 ft easement, and the gas company an easement with varying widths. There is an existing utility pole in this paved path. A car could probably navigate this path and stay on this property. A pick up truck might not make it without either continuing onto the Sewage Authority's property (still paved) or doing part of a K-turn to stay on this property.

I cannot find any exceptions for accessibility to the lower level as it is more than 3,000 sf and will have more than a 5 person occupant load per the IBC.

I am all for providing accessibility, but an elevator for a 5,000 sf addition (3,200 sf upper floor and 1,800 sf lower floor) seems a little disproportionate in cost.

If the owner creates a separate business name for the lower floor storage / warehouse, I assume an interior path would not be required as they as separate entities. Would this work?

And if none of these work, I can tell the owner to add the elevator, expand one floor but not the other, or scrap the project.

Thanks if you made it to the end.
 
If the first floor and second floor do not have an interior circulation path, than an exterior circulation path would be acceptable, and does not discriminate, as everyone would take the same path.
If this exterior path could not be made accessible (ramps on the hillside), then see if you can treat the upper and lower entry as two separate site arrival points intended only for use by vehicles.

I do not regularly use A117.1 in my practice, so take this with a grain of salt.
 
Mark - Thank you for asking. I had to rethink the property layout. There is physically room available for a ramp on the far side of the building, but not with the size of the proposed addition. It would need to be reduced in size, but I did not consider that as I was tasked with finding accessibility compliance while keeping the proposed addition. The ramp would be a minimum of 156 feet long, excluding landings, as the floor to floor height is 13'-6". Anything is possible if the owner is willing to pay, I guess. It would not be ideal for the interior building configuration, but doable.

Yikes - the two arrival points was what I was thinking. The far side of the building has a retaining wall, about 13'-6" tall. The building is supposed to be built to within inches of the property line, but I suppose I could tell the owner he needs to retain 4 ft to 5 ft for a ramp. The ramp would be perpendicular to the hill (to accommodate the addition) and have a bunch of switchbacks and turns to connect the upper parking lot to the lower floor level.

Is there any criteria that defines a walkable path that is not accessible? A slope of 1:12 is accessible with handrails and a slope of 1:20 is considered accessible without handrails. The only document I can think of with a maximum slope is the municipality's Street and Land Development Ordinance.

Thanks for the input you gave!!!!
 
I think the basic question of if a ambulatory person cannot get from one interior part of a building to another, is it still required to provide an accessible route, is the key here. If an ambulatory person can walk around the building on the exterior to get between levels then a person using a wheelchair should be able to also (assuming same tenant) would be my thought.
 
The excerpts below are not ANSI 117.1, but ADA Standards 206.2.2. You'll have to see if ANSI has something similar.

1674156988894.png
1674155841416.png

1674156176722.png

1674156227199.png

So it appears to me in ADA that building an addition onto your existing building does not necessarily mean that you must provide an accessible route between floors. The accessible route requirement in 202.4 is from the public right of way (and from parking, restrooms, etc.). going into the addition.

It does appear that the normal requirement is to provide an accessible route to connect accessible spaces within a site (206.2.2). In your situation, this implies an accessible exterior route between the upper story entrance and lower story entrance.

The exceptions for both of the previous requirements have to do with a site where the only means of access is a vehicular way not providing pedestrian access. Your site may be steep enough that this is your only option. However, in your original post you said "Employees could walk the 20 ft wide paved path (greater than 16% slope at some points)". I think this undercuts your case for avoiding construction of an accessible route. You are implying that the owner intends for the driveway to also function as a walkway for most able-bodied employees.

Lastly, keep in mind that you may be able to use a "LULA" elevator. These take up less space that a conventional elevator (they are closer in size to a wheelchair lift) and can be powered by 240 volt single phase if needed.
 
If the first floor and second floor do not have an interior circulation path, than an exterior circulation path would be acceptable, and does not discriminate, as everyone would take the same path.
If this exterior path could not be made accessible (ramps on the hillside), then see if you can treat the upper and lower entry as two separate site arrival points intended only for use by vehicles.

I do not regularly use A117.1 in my practice, so take this with a grain of salt.
1104.5 Location. Accessible routes shall coincide with or be
located in the same area as a general circulation path. Where
the circulation path is interior, the accessible route shall be
interior.
Where only one accessible route is provided, the
accessible route shall not pass through kitchens, storage
rooms, restrooms, closets or similar spaces.
 
1104.5 Location. Accessible routes shall coincide with or be
located in the same area as a general circulation path. Where
the circulation path is interior, the accessible route shall be
interior.
Where only one accessible route is provided, the
accessible route shall not pass through kitchens, storage
rooms, restrooms, closets or similar spaces.
Agreed. Post #1 implies that in this particular situation there was no interior circulation path:

If there are no stairs connecting the two floors, can I avoid an elevator? Employees could walk the 20 ft wide paved path (greater than 16% slope at some points) or drive this path from the upper floor parking lot to an accessible parking spot created for the lower level.
 
Top