What’s wrong with this picture?

Good work everybody! I’ll post my analysis on Friday…but you guys are hitting the major points pretty well!

Sorry it took me a while to get back to you all on this, but I wanted to be totally fair and precise, so I went back to this site to do some clandestine measurements.

Most of you spotted that the main issue here is the ramp. It certainly is unconventional for the circumstances. For those of you who guessed the ramp was a bit steep, you were mostly correct. I took my digital inclinometer (article coming soon) and took a few quick measurements. Being that the ramp has a pronounced crown in it, it was hard to get it to read properly, but the results were between a perfectly legal 8% and a non-compliant 10%.

But the real issue here is the design of the curb ramp itself. Most of you got the location of the fire hydrant and the terribly located planters as being obstructions, and they are, for a reason. For a curb ramp with a returned curb, meaning no side ramps, areas around the ramp must be inaccessible to pedestrians in order to avoid injury from the sidewalk sloping away and the unexpected drop of the curb. And that’s what the obstacles do, make the area inaccessible. Fine, that is compliant, only there is a larger problem here as they missed blocking the entire length of the sloping ramp, the most dangerous part! Technically, this should have a side ramp at no more than 1:12 slope to be in full compliance. But that kind of defeats the purpose of the side-slope curb ramp you say? Exactly, as if there was the room to do that, you would not need this type of ramp in the first place. A fence or other type of barrier needs to be installed to prevent pedestrian flow from the sidewalk directly on to the ramp, but then that prevents pedestrians from getting onto the sidewalk at all.

A standard curb ramp probably was not installed here due to the proximity of a pair of main ingress/egress doors on the side of the restaurant, but to my eye there may indeed room for a traditional ramp. Let’s just assume there isn’t. If this is a path of egress defined by the IBC code, which as an entry door it likely is, then a landing is required at the doors. Landings are required to be the full width of the door and extend 44” in the direction of travel from the threshold. As well, the landing must be level across the opening with a maximum slope in the direction of travel of 1:50 or 2%. The accessible ramp cannot intrude on that landing in any way. If that were to be the case, the doors facing the ramp should not have been installed, as the primary set is off of the same vestibule, only facing the “main street”. Additionally, any sheer drop such as curb face or a stair along an accessible or egress route can only be between 4” and 7”. The sloped ramp breaks this code without question, which is why we must pay VERY close attention to stairs that go across grade for compliance. If you got them fancy stairs that disappear into the sidewalk, they aren’t legal on egress routes.  Your local code may vary, but the most stringent code is the always the best to follow.

“What we have here is a failure to communicate.”   The LA who did the streetscape should have caught this, as should have the civil engineer. The issue could have been communicated to the developer and to the building architects who could have modified the door location, or just chose to install one set of doors, and a standard compliant ramp installed instead. As landscape architects, it is very often in our scope of work to be the bridge between the civil engineer and the building architect. It is our job, our responsibility, and our liability to be on the lookout for code and accessibility issues like this on every project we touch and coordinate the issues with the engineer or architect. Remember, the primary enforcement of the ADA is not through building code which rarely checks exterior compliance, but through litigation or ‘interested parties.’ You don’t want to needlessly wind up in court when you can easily avoid it.

Questions or comments? Post a reply. Or even post your own “Design Over-Site.”  Stay tuned for another round, coming soon…