The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutRE: IBC code section for handrails on ramps Mike Plane From:Jarrod Bordi Sent:Tuesday, February 6, 2024 14:40 To:kenny donandersonconstruction.com Cc:Mariann Griffith; openhandsllc@outlook.com; Kahler Nield; Joel Walker Subject:RE: IBC code section for handrails on ramps Hi Kenny, Thanks for reaching out. There has been a lot of back and forth with some deep dive within the IBC code. I have also spoke with Kahler, too. Below is a summary: 1. Since the occupant load is greater than 49, two exits are needed out this space, and both exits are required to be accessible (south and west exits)...see attached egress plan from Kahler. 2. IBC ramp definition attached along with when a handrail is required. 3. PROWAG governs routes within a public right of way, not private buildings/lots; means of egress and associated routes associated with private buildings/lots are governed by the IBC. 4. I am not sure I understand your question about using the east exit? Per the plans, there are south and west nd exits, no east exit. Are you wanting the hallway between the Speak Easy and the kitchen as the 2 exit access from the Speak Easy space? If so, doors 103 and 105 would need to swing the other direction and be equipped with panic exit hardware. Additionally, Kahler would need to measure the travel distance and submit a revised egress plan. I hope this answered your questions... Respectfully, Jarrod Bordi Senior Inspector/Plans Examiner City of Twin Falls Building Safety Department 203 Main Ave E Twin Falls, Idaho jbordi@tfid.org (208) 735-7341 1 From: kenny donandersonconstruction.com <kenny@donandersonconstruction.com> Sent: Tuesday, February 6, 2024 12:50 PM To: Jarrod Bordi <jbordi@tfid.org> Cc: Mariann Griffith <mariann.griffith@outlook.com>; openhandsllc@outlook.com; Kahler Nield <knield@ehminc.com> Subject: RE: IBC code section for handrails on ramps \[EXTERNAL SENDER\] Jarrod, I know this discussion has been going on for a while now and I do appreciate your time on this matter, but I would like some clarification on the ramp/handrail requirement. The occupancy of the speakeasy is at 54 so it requires two exits that are accessible to the public way, per IBC 1028.5. Access to a public way “the exit discharge shall provide a direct and unobstructed access to a public way”. My question relates to the section of concrete that was poured which has been referred to as a ramp. What considers this a ramp or a ramp with handrailing? If this was left as asphalt, or if a larger section of concrete was across the back area would it still be considered a ramp? Ramp construction does not specify asphalt or concrete. The concrete has the same slope as the asphalt parking area. The PROWAG allows a sidewalk adjacent to a roadway and does not require a landing or handrail, regardless of the roadway grade. Our situation is very similar, the asphalt parking lot has the same slope as the concrete. Can the exit discharge be to the east? Again, I know there has been a lot of back and forth, but I just am trying to do our due diligence for the owners before any costs are incurred on the handrail. Also, we do appreciate your cooperation in closing this project out. Respectively, Kenny Anderson kenny@donandersonconstruction.com Phone 208-734-2164 Fax 208-733-5200 From: Jessica Vollmer <jessica@donandersonconstruction.com> Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2024 3:28 PM To: kenny donandersonconstruction.com <kenny@donandersonconstruction.com> Cc: Mariann Griffith <mariann.griffith@outlook.com>; openhandsllc@outlook.com; Kahler Nield <knield@ehminc.com> Subject: FW: IBC code section for handrails on ramps FYI-Below is the most recent correspondence in regards to the railing at the South sidewalk. I spoke with Kahler yesterday, he stated that he had sent the question to Jarood on whether or not the front Turf entry could be considered one of the exit routes since it goes through to Griff’s, and was just waiting to hear back. I’ll let him update you all from here on out. ??????? From: Jarrod Bordi <jbordi@tfid.org> Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2024 5:30 AM To: Kahler Nield <knield@ehminc.com> Cc: Jessica Vollmer <jessica@donandersonconstruction.com> Subject: RE: IBC code section for handrails on ramps 2 Morning Kahler, Thanks for the follow up. I want to help put this item to bed. However, there a few code sections that we need to comply with. I have attached your floor with the designed occupant load of 54 in the Speak Easy space. Since the occupant load is greater than 49, two exits are needed out this space, and both exits are required to be accessible (south and west exits). You may be able use the attached code section, under exception #2, for the west exit; however, I am not sure how you plan to use the south exit as accessible exit to the public way w/o utilizing the new exterior concrete ramp? If the new exterior concrete ramp is part of the accessible route serving the south accessible exit, then this is where the handrail issues comes up. Please know I don’t want to overcomplicate this for you all, but I have personally seen this type of code issue end up in court when an occupant/patron trips where no handrails were installed. If you can get to a spot where you believe your alternate design meets the intent of the code and submit your narrative/explanation, we would review/accept it. Respectfully, Jarrod Bordi Senior Inspector/Plans Examiner City of Twin Falls Building Safety Department 203 Main Ave E Twin Falls, Idaho jbordi@tfid.org (208) 735-7341 From: Kahler Nield <knield@ehminc.com> Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2024 4:19 PM To: Jarrod Bordi <jbordi@tfid.org> Cc: 'Jessica Vollmer' <jessica@donandersonconstruction.com> Subject: FW: IBC code section for handrails on ramps \[EXTERNAL SENDER\] Jarrod, I have attached an updated site plan that uses the door on the west side of the speak easy as the second accessible means of egress. This door has a 5’x5’ landing and hand rails and meets the requirements for an exterior exit stairway, based on my review. Take a look at the attached plan and let me know you think I am missing something. Thanks. Thanks, Kahler Nield, P.E. 3 621 North College Road – Suite 100 Twin Falls, Idaho 83301 Phone: 208-734-4888 Fax: 208-734-6049 Email: knield@ehminc.com From: Jessica Vollmer \[mailto:jessica@donandersonconstruction.com\] Sent: Monday, January 15, 2024 4:03 PM To: Kahler Nield Subject: FW: IBC code section for handrails on ramps Good morning, Have you had an opportunity to review this? From: Jessica Vollmer Sent: Tuesday, January 9, 2024 8:18 AM To: Kahler Nield <knield@ehminc.com> Subject: FW: IBC code section for handrails on ramps From: Jarrod Bordi <jbordi@tfid.org> Sent: Tuesday, January 9, 2024 5:46 AM To: Jessica Vollmer <jessica@donandersonconstruction.com> Subject: RE: IBC code section for handrails on ramps Morning Jessica, Thanks for the follow up and inquiry. We certainly don’t want to cause an undue hardship or unnecessary additional expense for the owners. I am definitely open to Kahler providing an updated site plan showing compliance with IBC for nd the 2 accessible means of egress w/o using the new concrete ramp. We would review his proposal to eliminate the handrails on this specific ramp. Please note that IBC does regulate the accessible and non-accessible means of egress to the public way. For review and further clarification, I have attached some IBC code sections. Additionally, I would caution all parties about the possible risk/liability of a patron slipping or falling on this ramp w/o handrails (especially if they have had a few drinks) Kahler can just email me his site/floor plan change with code justification to eliminate the handrail for review....no need to submit an actual change order. Let’s keep it simple on this one. Respectfully, Jarrod Bordi Senior Inspector/Plans Examiner City of Twin Falls Building Safety Department 4 203 Main Ave E Twin Falls, Idaho jbordi@tfid.org (208) 735-7341 From: Jessica Vollmer <jessica@donandersonconstruction.com> Sent: Monday, January 8, 2024 4:55 PM To: Jarrod Bordi <jbordi@tfid.org> Subject: FW: IBC code section for handrails on ramps \[EXTERNAL SENDER\] Good afternoon, Last week I updated the owners on the discussion we had about the handrail that will be required on the ramp to the South at the Turf Club (of course they were not excited about the idea in any way ???????) so we wanted to reach out to Kahler at EHM about it. I did receive a quote on the railings and am not in any way trying to get out of getting them installed, just wanted to discuss it a little further with you after reviewing Kahler’s message to see what your thoughts were before doing so. See below; Thank you, Jessica Vollmer Don Anderson Construction 208-420-0611 From: Kahler Nield <knield@ehminc.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 2, 2024 11:46 AM To: Jessica Vollmer <jessica@donandersonconstruction.com> Subject: RE: IBC code section for handrails on ramps So, the ramps discussed in IBC 1012 are for ramps that are part of the means of egress. Where this ramp is located outside the building it not part of the means of egress. Per the federal ADA requirements (ICC A1171-2009) it says that ramps along an accessible route are to have hand rails. However, I think it can be argued that this ramp is not along an accessible route. The accessible route for this building is located at the front of the building and, the accessible route to the public way would be at the front of the building too. So, I think there might be a little gray area there where this may not be required to be accessible. I would point out that this is not a part of a means of egress or an accessible route to the building. Thanks, 5 Kahler Nield, P.E. 621 North College Road – Suite 100 Twin Falls, Idaho 83301 Phone: 208-734-4888 Fax: 208-734-6049 Email: knield@ehminc.com 6