ADA

[ptatohed]

Group, in recent years, I have been dealing a lot with Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) issues, particularly within the Public Right-Of-Way (PROW). Just throwing this out there in case anyone wants to discuss ADA guidelines, requirements, standards (state and/or federal), etc., especially as they relate to PROW paths of travel (sidewalks, ramps, street crossings, pedestrian buttons/signals, "street furniture", etc.).

PS. I believe ADA requirements is being added to the April 2015 NCEES exam outline (PM Transpo).

 

[NJmike PE]

OK. I'll bite. Where the hell did they come up with some of the requirements? Specifically, cross slopes for ADA walkways.

 

[ptatohed]

OK. I'll bite. Where the hell did they come up with some of the requirements? Specifically, cross slopes for ADA walkways.

What is your specific concern about the cross slopes? Too steep? Too flat? The cross-slope for ADA sidewalks/walkways is typically 2% max (1:50). I think 2% was agreed upon because it is a good compromise between accommodating drainage runoff and also keeping the walk as flat as possible for wheelchair users. Too steep a cross-slope can cause a wheelchair user to tend to roll down slope, or even tip over if it is too steep (say 5+%). Also, fatigue can set in if manually wheeling long lengths at cross-slopes over 2%.

 

[NJmike PE]

Too flat. Too precise. Too many governing bodies want them certified when it's very difficult to build within those tolerances. Especially within existing conditions

 

[ptatohed]

Too flat. Too precise. Too many governing bodies want them certified when it's very difficult to build within those tolerances. Especially within existing conditions

That’s why my city now has a 1.5% max cross-slope City Standard for sidewalks! So that when the contractor is off a little, it's (hopefully) still under 2%! I see what you mean. I do think the original intent of these minimum/maximums has been inflated. I think when the 2% was originally established it was probably on the conservative side allowing for some minor variance. Now that 'minor variance' is not tolerated!

 

[NJmike PE]

I recently had a county building inspector insist that I certify a 6 ft wide walk that varied between 2.5 percent and around 3.5 percent. Really? It was a paver walkway. Dude was ball bust over about 0.75 of an inch.

 

[ptatohed]

I recently had a county building inspector insist that I certify a 6 ft wide walk that varied between 2.5 percent and around 3.5 percent. Really? It was a paver walkway. Dude was ball bust over about 0.75 of an inch.

Write it in the specs and show it on the plans. Make sure the contractor knows if he exceeds ADA, he's redoing it. The inspectors should catch it early during construction so you don't end up with hundreds of feet of sidewalk that needs to be ripped out and redone.

 

[NJmike PE]

While it was noted on the plans that contractor was to verify the grades prior to construction it still ended up being our responsibility. This was a bit of a unique site, being that it was located in a developed down town district with an existing building. There was existing parking adjacent to the walk and stairs to the front entrance of some of the retail spaces. I recognize that stairs are hardly ADA compliant, but some of the units had wheelchair lifts to the first floor. Anyway, my point was that give the nature of the existing conditions, there was only so much that could be done. Initially, the contractor was a bit sloppy with the cross slopes, and he did adjust them. But the 3.5 percent was the best he could do.

 

[Road Guy]

As it was explained to me by the county attorney a few years ago, not complying with the Americans with disabilities act is the same thing in federal law as not complying with the civil rights act.

You can get seriously crossways in court for any new construction that doesn't follow it.

 

[Dexman PE PMP]

Try designing/building a train platform. Slope cannot exceed 2% in any direction. We built, tore out and rebuilt one platform 3 times on my last project because it wasn't right.

 

[ptatohed]

While it was noted on the plans that contractor was to verify the grades prior to construction it still ended up being our responsibility. This was a bit of a unique site, being that it was located in a developed down town district with an existing building. There was existing parking adjacent to the walk and stairs to the front entrance of some of the retail spaces. I recognize that stairs are hardly ADA compliant, but some of the units had wheelchair lifts to the first floor. Anyway, my point was that give the nature of the existing conditions, there was only so much that could be done. Initially, the contractor was a bit sloppy with the cross slopes, and he did adjust them. But the 3.5 percent was the best he could do.

Well, even though there is a lot of overlap between on-site and off-site (PROW), I don't really deal with on-site ADA too much (that's left to the building department). It sounds like your project is on-site? It also sounds like your project has retrofit constraints. What does your building code say in regard to retrofit projects vs. new construction? Usually there are looser requirements for retrofit.

 

[Road Guy]

3.5 would never fly for a public project

 

[NJmike PE]

and while I get that, this was a private job. even though the walkway was technically within the public ROW, it was a private retail project. I'm not overly thrilled by the deviation, but my gripe lies more in the establishment of the max slope. 6 ft @ 2% is 1.44 in. 6 ft @ 3.5% is 2.52 in. I'm sure that no one navigating a wheel chair will adversely affected by the additional 1.08 inches in elevation. I also realize that GOOD contractor should be able to make it all work correctly. That being said, on a private with a relatively limited budget, there is a point where the applicant should be expected to rip out all of the pavement and curbing within the county ROW and raise it up, especially if the work being done is not involving such areas. Given the adverse existing conditions, the work done meets the intent of the rules. Legally, anyone could analyze the post construction conditions and find something incorrect or substandard, just by manipulating a number or two. Its the overall intent. At least in my opinion it is.

 

[Boomer01 PE]

As a traffic consultant, the strict ADA guidelines wear me out. ADA requires two directional wheelchair ramps as opposed to a corner ramp which pushes the crosswalks back and therefore the stop bars back from the intersection. Now sidewalks are getting much wider therefore the spacing between ramps increases to accommodate the landing. I have seen the stop bars 50 feet back from the end of radius. You are required to sometimes add two ped poles per corner on top of the signal pole which clutters the corners. I have seen many jobs where the City construction crew builds a ramp only to have it torn out and rebuilt because of the ADA coalition who goes around checking each new ramp. I'm currently working on a federally funded striping job and was told I cannot even install new crosswalk striping if both ramps are not ADA compliant. The City we are working for had recently installed dozens of new ramps, but flared them out at the corners. They meet slopes and have truncated domes, but because they are not directional, the DOT told us they all must be ripped out and reconstructed and he didn't care because it was "free money". The City said screw it and declined the federal funds and are proceeding with the striping job at their own cost. All of this is costing the tax payers a fortune. I understand accommodating the blind and handicapped, but many of them have been getting around for a long time before this and ripping out an old wheelchair ramp to install a new one may or may not make a difference. I understand trying to always meet ADA complaints on new projects, but there are times when it is near impossible to do so because of ROW issues, utilities, etc. I know they still list corner ramps as an option, yet hardly ever let you use them.

 

[John QPE]

In PA the DOT got sued so bad for ADA ramps that they now are putting them in at every intersection along State highways ..... even those without sidewalks. I guess you can argue that they are refuge areas of some sort, but they look ridiculous, especially in the more rural sections of the state.

FYI .. there is a DOJ phone number you can call with technical questions. I can't for the life of me find it right now, but I've used it a lot and it can be quite helpful.

 

[JMT]

As it was explained to me by the county attorney a few years ago, not complying with the Americans with disabilities act is the same thing in federal law as not complying with the civil rights act.

You can get seriously crossways in court for any new construction that doesn't follow it.

I work for a civil consulting company and we do a lot of work for the California State Universities. Over the past ten years some of these campuses have gotten hit with huge lawsuits and they have thrown TONS of money into removing and replacing their paths of travel. On one campus we have redesigned about 80% of the campus POTs and 6 of their 8 parking lots. Millions of dollars in construction because of a few percentages in slope.

The only issue I had was when the California Building Code decided to change their ADA regulations to follow the Federal ADA in the 2013 CBC. That transition made it hard as shit to find where all of the new requirements were placed; and we have found quite a few errors in the text and figures.

 

[Road Guy]

some Federal agency folks wanted to require bringing all ADA ramps up to current standards even on only resurfacing projects. I think that idea died...

I will say that as part of a committee I was on to find a way to "do what we could " do upgrade ADA ramps without breaking the county bank, I was a government manager type job and was challenged by the ADA community to travel a given road in a wheel chair. The road was Wade Green Road in Kennesaw, GA (Atlanta suburb). It had a few questionable driveways that were mostly constructed by developers and a crappy county agency that didn't enforce the standards as they should. Well let me tell you, that 2% may seem flat, but going from a 2% cross slope to a driveway that is 4% the other way, it was very difficult for me to keep from falling out of the wheelchair.

 

[JMT]

some Federal agency folks wanted to require bringing all ADA ramps up to current standards even on only resurfacing projects. I think that idea died...

MUCH smaller scale but, I just started a 1.2 mile resurfacing project for a local city. During the initial field walk (after wining the design contract) the City Engineer decided he wanted all sidewalks, driveways, ramps and intersections to be ADA compliant. He said he reads the CBC as, if you resurface a street then everything in the PROW needs to meet current ADA. Probably 80-90% R&R on all that because almost nothing is compliant. I didn't ask for the code section but that has never been my understanding of the CBC or the ADA Standards for Accessible Design.

 

[Dexman PE PMP]

I've just gone with the idea of "if you touch it, you need to make it up to code". Resurfacing a roadway does not alter the sidewalk = not touched = piss off

 

[NJmike PE]

I like that approach however being a consultant and pissing off the douches in power never ends well. They usually make you life a living hell