# Fire  Stations  and  ADA



## globe trekker

Greetings to you all!

I have an existing fire station that is being remodeled / updated. They will have

new fire rated assemblies separating the various Occ. Groups ( S-1 from R-2 from

B ). The RDP has *some* ADA components indicated on the plans. The newly

remodeled bathroom has a shower that is not ADA compliant.

The Fire Chief is telling me that because they are considered a "restricted use

/ restricted access" (para-military) type of organization, that they do not have

to have a fully ADA facility, and that the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) allows

this exemption. Also, that there is case law that will also support these types

of exemptions.

What say ye, `O learned Forum members & guests?

.


----------



## steveray

Even if they are exempt from ADA...they are not exempt from the building code...how about 3409.6? Or 3409 in general? Here...technically infeasible is determined by the State BO and the State Office of Advocacy for people w/ disabilities.....we don't see too many exceptions....


----------



## mark handler

The ADA does require for all new buildings constructed by a state or local government be accessible

Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards (UFAS) or the Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines for Buildings and Facilities (ADAAG).

Although fire stations are built for first responders, the stations  shall be constructed to comply with accessibility standards for kitchen, dormitories, libraries, laundry rooms, meeting rooms, restrooms, etc., particularly when such facilities are used by non firefighters.

The ADAAG addresses in detail the requirements to be met in facility construction in order to be in compliance with the ADA including but not limited to; work areas, building additions, parking, signs, entrances, water fountains, storage and shelves, assembly areas, bathrooms, historic buildings and residential facilities. Work area requirements apply to those areas “used only by employees as work areas be designed and constructed so that individuals with disabilities can approach, enter and exit the areas”

At a minimum the bathing and restroom facilities will need to be adaptible, just as in a "private restroom" in other threads on this site.


----------



## globe trekker

The Fire Chief is telling me that he cannot ( and will not) allow anyone in the facility; other

than the general public, and that anyone that is not fit for duty cannot use the shower,

for liability reasons. Also, he, as the Fire Code Official; DOES have the authority to

limit the use of the resources and facilities under his charge of responsibility, ..so

typically, the general public will not be using the shower or cooking in the kitchen area,

and that anyone who is not fit for duty also cannot use those elements within the station,

because of potential litigation (EX: If the Fire Chief allows one of his staff; or other

municipal employees or even the general public, to use the facilities and that person

somehow gets hurt, or causes someone else to get hurt, or anything else, then the

municipality could be sued and he could be terminated. )

It's a CYA Factor for sure, regardless of any Chapter in the Building Code, or the ADA!

Now what say ye?

.


----------



## mark handler

The ADA does not use the "General Public" term.

The station must allow access to Work areas requirements apply to those areas “used only by employees as work areas be designed and constructed so that individuals with disabilities can approach, enter and exit the areas”. And at a minimum the bathing and restroom facilities will need to be adaptible, the only time a "private restroom" can be applied is when accessed though a private office.


----------



## Examiner

Oh, I think ADA/DOJ will teach him a lesson in due time.


----------



## cda

The Fire Chief is telling me that he cannot ( and will not) allow anyone in the facility; other

than """""the general public,"""""

So will the general public be allowed in?????


----------



## mark handler

cda said:
			
		

> The Fire Chief is telling me that he cannot ( and will not) allow anyone in the facility; otherthan """""the general public,"""""
> 
> So will the general public be allowed in?????


General Public, but not disabled people. Including any disabled Firefighters.....

Blacks must use the colored door....


----------



## mark handler

FIRE CHIEF Magazine

Monday, February 6, 2012

Special Access

Apr 1, 2007 12:00 PM

 By Mary McGrath

http://firechief.com/station-design/firefighting_special_access/

Many believe that because firefighters are able-bodied, only the public areas of a fire station need disability access. Building codes in some states support this position by specifically providing exceptions for accessibility in the non-public areas of a fire station. However, the American with Disabilities Act doesn't allow such exceptions.

Although ADA standards will affect the design of every space within the station and most of those spaces require planning, many modifications don't add space or cost to a new facility.

Building features

The ADA requires the elimination of physical and communication barriers that prevent people with disabilities from fully participating in community life. Title II, Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability in State and Local Government Service, applies to public entities including districts, city governments, towns and villages, and the fire departments that serve them. This standard covers all government facilities, including fire stations.

When U.S. Rep. Joe Scarborough (R-Fla.) questioned the requirement of an elevator in a 2-story fire station, the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice responded, “… ADA standards require covered entities to provide an accessible mean of vertical access (such as a ramp, lift or elevator) to connect all floor levels in multi-story buildings.”

Scarborough's request was based on the assumption that if the principal users of a facility are able-bodied individuals, the facility may be designed exclusively to serve them. However, “even if a fire department could establish that the employment requirements of Title I and Title II of the ADA support the exclusion of people with mobility impairments from employment as firefighters, that fact does not support the conclusion that no person with a disability will need access to the second floor of a fire station.” This means that no matter what is on the second floor, an elevator is required in multi-story fire stations.

Besides the elevator, there are a number of accessible elements of fire station design that must be considered, depending on the programs and functions that occur within the station. The fire service needs to consider physical barriers such as stairs, restrooms/locker rooms, doors and accessible routes into and through a fire facility. All stations require van accessible parking and an accessible path of travel to, in and throughout the facility.

The range of disabilities that the fire station must accommodate includes not only mobility impairments but also vision and hearing impairments. For instance, a community room may need to be equipped with assisted-listening devises. TTY phones may need to be included at emergency phones. The station also may need accessible signage providing building identification and fire alarms with visible signals.

Program access

ADA regulations apply to more than your stations. All publicly funded fire department programs, services and activities must comply with the ADA because they are considered “instrumentalities” of the government. For the fire service, that means Community Emergency Response Team programs, station tours, pancake breakfasts, and fire prevention and education programs all must allow the disabled to participate fully.

The fire department also must take the ADA into account for emergency response planning. For instance, the department's evacuation plan must enable those who have mobility, vision or hearing impairments; cognitive disabilities; mental illness; or other disabilities to safely self-evacuate or be evacuated by others. The fire department will need to ensure that its emergency warning system also includes an alternate system to inform those with hearing impairments of an impending disaster.

Emergency management procedures also must address accessibility to emergency shelters or refuge areas. This includes planning for shelters with emergency generators that can run a refrigerator to keep medications cold (or planning for a cooler and having ice available) and planning to accommodate service animals so that people who use such animals aren't unnecessarily separated from them. In general, an emergency shelter must provide the same level of access for parking, exterior routes and entrances, interior routes to the shelter area and toilet rooms as other public buildings.

Finally, the municipality must ensure that any entity providing emergency services on a contract basis comply with the provisions of the ADA on its behalf.

From communication to evacuation and sheltering, every step of the way requires access for the disabled community to be considered in the planning process.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mary McGrath, AIA, is the director of civic architecture for Ratcliff in Emeryville, Calif., and has dedicated her 20-year career to the planning and design of public safety facilities. She can be reached at


----------



## Papio Bldg Dept

Thanks Mark.


----------



## mark handler

Text-only version

                                            U.S. Department of Justice

                                            Civil Rights Division

                                            Coordination and Review Section

DJ 204-45-0                                    P.O. Box 66118

                                            Washington, D.C. 20035-6118

Sheri E. Long, Esquire

Assistant City Attorney

City of Omaha

Omaha/Douglas Civic Center

1819 Farnam Street

Suite 804

Omaha, Nebraska 68183-0804

Dear Ms. Long:

     This letter responds to the issues you raised in your letter of August 2, 1993, and in your December 14, 1993, phone conversation with Anne Marie Pecht, of my staff. In your letter you requested our opinion as to whether certain renovations that the City of Omaha is planning to make in a number of its firehouses will comply with the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA). After Ms. Pecht spoke with you she discovered that you had also raised these issues in a letter to Senator Kerrey, which was recently forwarded to this office for our assistance in responding. You may already have received a response through Senator Kerrey's office. Because Ms. Pecht spoke directly with you she was able to provide the additional, more specific, information included in this letter.

     The ADA authorizes the Department of Justice to provide technical assistance to individuals and entities with rights or obligations under the Act. This letter provides informal guidance to assist you in understanding the requirements of the ADA. It does not, however, constitute a legal interpretation and is not binding on the Department of Justice.

     As you discussed with Ms. Pecht, you are aware that the ADA does not require the City of Omaha to renovate its firehouses, unless renovations are necessary to provide program access. We understand, however, that you are making these renovations for

other purposes. Section 35.151 of the enclosed title II regulation covers new construction and alterations by entities subject to title II of the ADA, that is, State and local governmental entities such as the City of Omaha. Section 35.151(b) of the title II regulation requires that any alteration to a title II facility that affects or could affect the usability of the facility must, to the maximum extent feasible, be made in such a manner that the altered portion of the facility is "readily accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities." Section 35.151© of the title II regulation currently allows title II entities to meet this requirement by following either the Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards

(UFAS) or the Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines for Buildings and Facilities (ADAAG), except that the elevator exception contained in sections 4.1.3(5) and 4.1.6(1)(k) of ADAAG is not available for title II facilities.

     We understand that the City of Omaha has selected ADAAG as its accessibility standard. Therefore, the balance of this discussion will refer to the applicable sections of ADAAG. (As you discussed with Ms. Pecht, the U.S. Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board (Access Board) and the Department of Justice are in the process of amending ADAAG to include provisions directly applicable to title II facilities.

After the revised Accessibility Guidelines are adopted by the Department of Justice, title II entities will be required to

follow ADAAG and will no longer have the option of following UFAS. (We look forward to receiving any comments you may have on

the proposed title II Guidelines when they are published by the Department of Justice.)

     Your letter attempts to distinguish between renovations to bathroom and shower facilities in fire stations that are used solely by fire fighters (and not open in any way to members of the public) and renovations to those same facilities in fire stations that you plan to use for civil defense purposes. Under title II, however, restrooms and shower facilities (along with employee lounges, cafeterias, health units, and exercise facilities) are considered common use areas, and must be

constructed or altered in full compliance with ADAAG, whether they are open to the public or are planned to be used solely by employees (such as fire fighters) who must meet rigorous physical qualification standards in order to perform the essential functions of their jobs.

     Note, however, that areas used only by employees as work areas are subject to a more limited requirement. section 4.1.1(3) of ADAAG provides that employee work areas must be designed and constructed so that employees with disabilities can approach, enter, and exit such areas. The adaptations required by an individual employee with disabilities to permit that individual to work within the work area would, as you pointed out, be treated on a case-by-case basis as a reasonable accommodation under the standards established under title I of the ADA. The requirements applicable to employee work and common use areas are discussed in section III-7.3110 of the enclosed title III Technical Assistance Manual. For your convenience, we have also enclosed a copy of the title II Manual.

     The basic rule for alterations under ADAAG is that, when existing elements, spaces, or common areas are altered, each altered element, space, feature, or area shall comply with the applicable ADAAG requirements for new construction. See section 4.1.6(1)(b). The requirements for accessible toilet rooms (i.e., rooms that include fixtures such as water closets, toilet stalls, urinals, and lavatories) are located in section 4.22 of ADAAG. The requirements for accessible bathrooms, bathing facilities, and shower rooms are located in section 4.23.

     An exception to full compliance with the standards for new construction is made when compliance would be "technically infeasible", as that term is defined under section 4.1.6(l)(j) of ADAAG. If it is technically infeasible to comply with 4.22 or 4.23 when altering toilet or bathing facilities, section 4.1.6(3)(e)(i) permits the installation of one unisex facility located in the same area as the existing facilities, in lieu of modifying the existing facilities to be accessible. If stalls are provided, section 4.1.6(3)(e)(ii) permits the use of one of the smaller alternate stalls where it is technically infeasible to install a standard stall.

     As we understand it, there are three possible situations you may encounter in undertaking this renovation project, as follows: (i) an existing men's toilet room and/or shower room will be renovated and comparable women's facilities will be added; (ii) an existing men's toilet and/or shower room will be converted to unisex use; or (iii) a completely new unisex toilet and/or shower room will be added.

     With respect to situation (i) above, the renovated men's facilities and the new women's facilities must comply with ADAAG standards for new construction, unless compliance is technically infeasible, in which case you may either install a unisex toilet and/or shower room as provided in section 4.1.6(3)(e)(i), or reduce the stall size as permitted by section 4.1.6(3)(e)(ii)

Please note, however, that the technical infeasibility exception is meant to be a very limited exception to the requirement for

accessibility in alterations. When entirely new facilities (such as the planned women's facilities) are located within an existing building, the exception for technical infeasibility will be very strictly interpreted. With respect to the situation described in (ii) above, it is permissible to convert an existing men's toilet and/or shower room to a unisex room. In the situation described in (iii) above, it is permissible to create a single new unisex toilet and/or shower room. In both cases the new unisex rooms must comply with the ADA Guidelines.

                                4

     For assistance in complying with technical aspects of the ADA Accessibility Guidelines, you may wish to contact an accessibility specialist at the Access Board by telephone at 800-USA-ABLE or 202-272-5434, or by TDD at 202-272-5449.

     I hope this information has been helpful to you.

                                 Sincerely,

                             Stewart B. Oneglia

                                   Chief

                        Coordination and Review Section

                              Civil Rights Division

Enclosures (3)

01-02888


----------



## mark handler

March 24, 1999

http://www.justice.gov/crt/foia/readingroom/frequent_requests/ada_coreletter/ltr220.php

The Honorable Joe Scarborough

U.S. House of Representatives

Washington, D.C. 20515

Dear Congressman Scarborough:

I am responding to your letter on behalf of State Representative Jerry Melvin regarding the application of the new construction requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) to the construction of fire stations. Mr. Melvin questions the conclusion of the State of Florida that the ADA (and the Florida Accessibility Code for Building Construction) require the installation of an elevator to provide access to the second floor of a fire station.

Title II of the ADA prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability in all of the programs, services, and activities of a public entity. Both title I and title II of the ADA prohibit discrimination on the basis of disability in employment. One aspect of this nondiscrimination mandate is the obligation to ensure that all new public buildings and facilities are readily accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities. The federal regulation implementing title II (28 C.F.R. pt.35) permits covered entities to meet this obligation by complying with either of two design standards -- the Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards (UFAS) or the ADA Standards for Accessible Design.

Both UFAS and the ADA Standards require covered entities to provide an accessible means of vertical access (such as a ramp, a lift, or an elevator) to connect all floor levels in multi-story buildings. Mr. Melvin objects to this requirement because he believes that individuals with disabilities who require the use of an elevator are not eligible to be fire fighters.

Mr. Melvin's analysis appears to be based on the assumption that if the principal users of a facility will be able-bodied individuals, the facility may be designed exclusively to serve them. This analysis conflicts with the primary purpose of the new construction requirements of the ADA, which is to ensure that people with disabilities are not excluded from opportunities that would otherwise be available to them, because buildings are not accessible.

Even if a fire department could establish that the employment requirements of titles I and II of the ADA support exclusion of people who have mobility impairments from employment as fire fighters, that fact does not support the conclusion that no person with a disability will need access to the second floor of the fire station. For example, other employees, such as those responsible for cleaning, maintenance, and clerical tasks, may need access to some or all of the areas in question. Supervisory personnel and city officials may also need access to such areas. It is not likely that persons with physical disabilities may be lawfully excluded from those types of positions or denied access to the second floor of a public building.

In addition, the useful life of a building may span many decades during which the uses of the facility can change. Although the current users of a facility may be fire fighters and other fire department employees, a public entity may later decide to open the facility for school tours, neighborhood association meetings, or other public activities that are required to be accessible.

I hope this information is helpful to you. Please do not hesitate to contact the Department if we may be of assistance with other matters.

Sincerely,

Bill Lann Lee

Acting Assistant

Attorney General

Civil Rights Division


----------



## globe trekker

The Fire Chief will allow the general public in to the facility, just not use the shower or kitchen.

Other ADA components will be in place, ..egress widths, ...accessible entrances, ..door swing

clearances, ..parking, ..sidewalk & ramps, etc.

The general public will not need to use the shower or the kitchen, but they will have

accessible access to the facility. Too much potential liability!

.


----------



## mark handler

* Spend the money now or spend it later, what he wants does not matter*

5/19/2011

http://www.thebrunswicknews.com/story/link/print/ADA-051811-HR-sdw

Stations face ADA deadline

By LOUIE BROGDON The Brunswick News

Glynn County will spend thousands of dollars on a fire station that is slated to be torn down and rebuilt if voters support a new 1 percent sales tax in November.

Glynn County fire officials are asking to spend $41,100 for an architectural analysis of three fire stations that are not up to federal guidelines, even when one of the buildings may be torn down and rebuilt.

The Glynn County Commission will decide whether to appropriate the funds when it meets at 6 p.m. today at the old county courthouse, 701 G St.

Glynn County Fire Chief Al Thomas said an agreed-upon deadline with the U.S. Department of Justice to bring fire stations Nos. 1, 3 and 6 in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act is quickly approaching.

At the same time, fire officials are asking for a new station No. 1, at 4310 Community Road, to be added to the proposed Special Purpose Local Option Sales Tax 6. Because the justice department agreement will come before that happens, the fire department will have to shell out the funds to get the old station analyzed and renovated.

Renovation costs for the station have not yet been assessed, Thomas said.

Asking the justice department to hold off on station No. 1 is not an option because the new station - which would depend on a positive SPLOST 6 vote - isn't a sure thing, Thomas said.

"The big deal is there is not a SPLOST in place yet. There is just a request," he said.

Deputy Chief Ray Marat said the three stations have numerous minor problems that keep them from meeting ADA guidelines. Some doorways are not wide enough for wheelchair access, some toilets are not the right distance from the wall and some stations lack ramps and other handicap access features.

Acting Public Works Director Becky Rowell told the finance committee recently that the Department of Justice settlement is set in stone. She said the Justice Department will not budge on the station No. 1 deadline.

The justice department settlement was signed Nov. 2, 2009, and requires station No. 1 to be compliant by Nov. 2 this year, according to a recent memo set to the finance committee.

Stations Nos. 3 and 6 must meet federal requirements by 2013.


----------



## mark handler

If he wants the facility to be nonaccessible, have* him *provide a letter from the fed's allowing it to be exempt.

Or have the city attorney get involved. It is a lawsuit waiting to happen. And the chief will not have to pay the bill.


----------



## Papio Bldg Dept

mark handler said:
			
		

> Text-only version                                             U.S. Department of Justice
> 
> Civil Rights Division
> 
> Coordination and Review Section
> 
> DJ 204-45-0                                    P.O. Box 66118
> 
> Washington, D.C. 20035-6118
> 
> Sheri E. Long, Esquire
> 
> Assistant City Attorney
> 
> City of Omaha
> 
> Omaha/Douglas Civic Center
> 
> 1819 Farnam Street
> 
> Suite 804
> 
> Omaha, Nebraska 68183-0804


Special thanks for this post as it directly pertains to my backyard.  I can say, I have seen only minor and limited reaction to the DOJ's visit.  For example, thier standard plates have been revised, but IMO, they will not meet the new PROWAG proposals when they are adopted.


----------



## steveray

Mobility impaired dispatcher?....he doesn't need sprinklers either because they have a truck right?


----------



## mark handler

steveray said:
			
		

> Mobility impaired dispatcher?....


He won't Consider a disabled dispatcher because the facility is not accessible, circular reasoning



> he doesn't need sprinklers either because they have a truck right?


Between 1996 and 1998, an average of approximately 150 fires occur in fire stations annually.

http://www.usfa.fema.gov/downloads/pdf/tfrs/v1i19-508.pdf


----------



## brudgers

globe trekker said:
			
		

> The Fire Chief is telling me that he cannot ( and will not) allow anyone in the facility; other than the general public, and that anyone that is not fit for duty cannot use the shower, for liability reasons. Also, he, as the Fire Code Official; DOES have the authority to limit the use of the resources and facilities under his charge of responsibility, ..so typically, the general public will not be using the shower or cooking in the kitchen area, and that anyone who is not fit for duty also cannot use those elements within the station, because of potential litigation (EX: If the Fire Chief allows one of his staff; or other municipal employees or even the general public, to use the facilities and that person somehow gets hurt, or causes someone else to get hurt, or anything else, then the municipality could be sued and he could be terminated. )  It's a CYA Factor for sure, regardless of any Chapter in the Building Code, or the ADA!  Now what say ye?.


  When the Fire Chief gets fired for leading his organization into civil rights litigation, he will no longer be empowered with such authority...i.e. local yokels cannot waive accessibility requirements.


----------



## globe trekker

steveray,

The remodeled fire station will be sprinkled with an 13R type system!

As far as the "mobility impaired dispatcher", I'm not sure. This is an excellent topic and good

discussion from everyone. I will bring this to the attention of the FCO and the BO and let

them decide which direction to go. If I stick my nose in it, it would not be appropriate

(here). I am the Messenger!

.


----------



## steveray

IF...all of the primary function areas are on the first floor, and IF they are all 100% accessible, he may be OK under building code, but I leave the ADA to the experts and lawyers....


----------



## Big Mac

Not only does he need to meet all accessibility requirements, he need a full NFPA13 sprinler system too.


----------



## gbhammer

Big Mac said:
			
		

> Not only does he need to meet all accessibility requirements, he need a full NFPA13 sprinler system too.


We have only in the last few years been able to get some of the fire districts to apply for permits, and those that do get permits try to comply.


----------



## mtlogcabin

The FCO has a boss, probably a number of them and they own the facilities not him, I bet the city attorney could set him straight after he reads what Mark posted.


----------



## globe trekker

Big Mac,

Which code sections require the " 13 "  vs  a " 13R "?

.


----------



## brudgers

globe trekker said:
			
		

> Big Mac,  Which code sections require the " 13 "  vs  a " 13R "?


  Same one which doesn't require a hood over the fire station's cooktop.


----------



## TheCommish

So a citizen will never come to the station to get a report, be interviewed in connection with an incident, the town fathers, mayor, congressman will never visit the station, he will never hire a administrative assistant, have his mother visit or have a fire prevention week open house with the public visiting the station.

All or any that any that may need accessibility accommodations, remember it is not just wheelchair bound people, people with walkers, canes, people with problems grasping, things in their hands.

Even able body persons enjoy the conveyance of accessibility accommodations.


----------



## mark handler

TheCommish said:
			
		

> So a citizen will never come to the station to get a report, be interviewed in connection with an incident, the town fathers, mayor, congressman will never visit the station, he will never hire a administrative assistant, have his mother visit or have a fire prevention week open house with the public visiting the station. All or any that any that may need accessibility accommodations, remember it is not just wheelchair bound people, people with walkers, canes, people with problems grasping, things in their hands.
> 
> Even able body persons enjoy the conveyance of accessibility accommodations.


That includes disabled firefighters


----------



## mtlogcabin

From the OP it is the shower the FC states will not be used by the public. I guess there has never been a fire fighter come back from a call with a twisted knee, sprained ankle or strained back or maybe just overly exhausted that may need or want a rail to hang onto so the don't slip or fall while getting cleaned up before seeking treatment


----------



## Papio Bldg Dept

mtlogcabin said:
			
		

> From the OP it is the shower the FC states will not be used by the public. I guess there has never been a fire fighter come back from a call with a twisted knee, sprained ankle or strained back or maybe just overly exhausted that may need or want a rail to hang onto so the don't slip or fall while getting cleaned up before seeking treatment


I think the OP said only able bodied would be permitted in the building...I guess those you mentioned would have to sit outside until they get better.  j/k


----------



## gbhammer

What about the temporarily impaired, I broke my ankle bad 5 years ago and could not walk for an entire year. Even after I started physical therapy it was difficult to get around well.


----------



## globe trekker

Continuing on..

From the 2010 Guidance on the 2010 (ADA) Standards:

*§ 35.151(d) Scope of coverage*

In the NPRM, the Department proposed a new provision, Sec. 35.151(d), to clarify that the

requirements established by Sec. 35.151, including those contained in the 2004 ADAAG,

prescribe what is necessary to ensure that buildings and facilities, including fixed or

built-in elements in new or altered facilities, are accessible to individuals with disabilities.

Once the construction or alteration of a facility has been completed, all other aspects of

programs, services, and activities conducted in that facility are subject to the operational

requirements established in this final rule. Although the Department may use the

requirements of the 2010 Standards as a guide to determining when and how to make

equipment and furnishings accessible, those determinations fall within the discretionary

authority of the Department.

The Department also wishes to clarify that the advisory notes, appendix notes, and

figures that accompany the 1991 and 2010 Standards do not establish separately

enforceable requirements unless specifically stated otherwise in the text of the standards.

This clarification has been made to address concerns expressed by ANPRM commenters

who mistakenly believed that the advisory notes in the 2004 ADAAG established

requirements beyond those established in the text of the guidelines (e.g., Advisory

504.4 suggests, but does not require, that covered entities provide visual contrast on

stair tread nosing to make them more visible to individuals with low vision). The

Department received no significant comments on this section and it is unchanged in

the final rule.

_Definitions of residential facilities and transient lodging._ The 2010 Standards add

a definition of “residential dwelling unit” and modify the current definition of “transient

lodging.” Under section 106.5 of the 2010 Standards, “residential dwelling unit” is

defined as “[a] unit intended to be used as a residence, that is primarily long-term

in nature” and does not include transient lodging, inpatient medical care, licensed

long-term care, and detention or correctional facilities. Additionally, Section 106.5

of the 2010 Standards changes the definition of “transient lodging” to a building or facility

“containing one or more guest room(s) for sleeping that provides accommodations that

are primarily short-term in nature.” “Transient lodging” does not include residential dwelling

units intended to be used as a residence. The references to “dwelling units” and “dormitories”

that are in the definition of the 1991 Standards are omitted from the 2010 Standards.

The comments about the application of transient lodging or residential standards to social

service center establishments, and housing at a place of education are addressed separately

below. The Department received one additional comment on this issue from an

organization representing emergency response personnel seeking an exemption from the

transient lodging accessibility requirements for crew quarters and common use areas serving

those crew quarters (e.g., locker rooms, exercise rooms, day room) that are used exclusively

by on-duty emergency response personnel and that are not used for any public purpose.

The commenter argued that since emergency response personnel must meet certain physical

qualifications that have the effect of exempting persons with mobility disabilities, there is

no need to build crew quarters and common use areas serving those crew quarters to meet

the 2004 ADAAG. In addition, the commenter argued that applying the transient lodging

standards would impose significant costs and create living space that is less usable for

most emergency response personnel.

The ADA does not exempt spaces because of a belief or policy that excludes persons with

disabilities from certain work. However, the Department believes that crew quarters that

are used exclusively as a residence by emergency response personnel and the kitchens

and bathrooms exclusively serving those quarters are more like residential dwelling units

and are therefore covered by the residential dwelling standards in the 2010 Standards,

not the transient lodging standards. The residential dwelling standards address most of

the concerns of the commenter. For example, the commenter was concerned that sinks in

kitchens and lavatories in bathrooms that are accessible under the transient lodging

standards would be too low to be comfortably used by emergency response personnel.

The residential dwelling standards allow such features to be adaptable so that they would

not have to be lowered until accessibility was needed. Similarly, grab bars and shower

seats would not have to be installed at the time of construction provided that

reinforcement has been installed in walls and located so as to permit their installation

at a later date.

*DISCLAIMER:* I am not familiar enough with the ADA Design Standards to be able to

determine what is actually required in this application. I am still learning!

The comments and information posted so far have been extremely helpful, so

"Thanks ya'll" !   

That said, it is my understanding that there is an exemption for Fire Stations.

Refer to the Brady Fire Service Law. Also, the verbage above seems to grant an

exemption to these type facilities. The classification for the Fire Station Residential

areas seem to be an R-3.

Now what say ye?

*NOTE:* The guests and lurkers are encouraged to engage in to this discussion, as

well as, any of the other topics on here. Besides, ya'll may know something that

will clarify the topic for others.

.


----------



## mark handler

I say contact the DOJ.

Seeing some of the comments from many on this board, makes me question their Knowledge

Here is 20 pages of SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTs between cities and the DOJ regarding access to Fire stations

http://searchjustice.usdoj.gov/search?q=%22fire+station%22&btnG=Search+ADA+Website&q=site%3Awww.ada.gov&sort=date%3AD%3AL%3Ad1&output=xml_no_dtd&ie=iso-8859-1&oe=UTF-8&client=default_frontend&proxystylesheet=default_frontend&site=default_collection&ip=71.189.92.234%2C10.4.254.29%2C10.14.4.33&access=p&entqr=0&entqrm=0&ud=1&start=0


----------



## Big Mac

13R systems are for Residential Strucutures, hence the 'R'.  It was not intneded for use in Commercial strucutres dedicated primarily to ohter uses such as 'S' / 'A' / 'B' which are the uses normally found in Fire Stations.  If that were not he case, why would even have a standard other than NFPA13?


----------



## Big Mac

Globe Trekker - Why would it not be more like  dormitory????  Dormitories are specifically listed as an R-2


----------



## mark handler

Big Mac said:
			
		

> 13R systems are for Residential Strucutures, hence the 'R'.  It was not intneded for use in Commercial strucutres dedicated primarily to ohter uses such as 'S' / 'A' / 'B' which are the uses normally found in Fire Stations.  If that were not he case, why would even have a standard other than NFPA13?


Office Area (B)

Apparatus Bays (S)or (B)

Sleeping Area (R-2)

Day Room (A-3) or (B)

Training Room (A-3)or (B)

NFPA13


----------



## Papio Bldg Dept

mark handler said:
			
		

> I say contact the DOJ. Seeing some of the comments from many on this board, makes me question their Knowledge
> 
> Here is 20 pages of SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTs between cities and the DOJ regarding access to Fire stations
> 
> http://searchjustice.usdoj.gov/search?q=%22fire+station%22&btnG=Search+ADA+Website&q=site%3Awww.ada.gov&sort=date%3AD%3AL%3Ad1&output=xml_no_dtd&ie=iso-8859-1&oe=UTF-8&client=default_frontend&proxystylesheet=default_frontend&site=default_collection&ip=71.189.92.234%2C10.4.254.29%2C10.14.4.33&access=p&entqr=0&entqrm=0&ud=1&start=0


As you and many others on this board have helped me to recognize, there are limits to my knowledge, and in some cases it is best to seek guidance from the access-board and/or DOJ.  That being said, I do not enforce the ADA, but rather the accessibility standards my jurisdiction has adopted.  I have not been told this, however, I assume, yet make no certain claim, that we have adopted certain codes and standards to help ensure that those facilities within our jurisdiction will also be compliant with the ADA and avoid a lawsuit.  Furthermore, the fire stations that fall within our jurisdiction receive no exemption from Chapter 11 IBC compliance for accessibility.


----------



## Big Mac

Well I certainly butchered one of the two most recent posts.  Let me try and clean that up a bit.

13R systems are intended for use in Residential Strucutures, hence the 'R'. It was not intended for use in Commercial Structures dedicated primarily to uses other than 'Use Group R', such as 'S' / 'A' / and 'B' which are normally found in Fire Stations. If that were not the case, why would they even have a standard other than NFPA13R?

While I'm at it, I will reiterate that the placement and use of these sleeping rooms look far more like a dormitory setting than a single family residence.

Dang, I miss spell check.  Of course I could use grammer check as well.  My fingers get ahead of my brain far too often, and my fingers are pretty slow.


----------



## brudgers

Big Mac said:
			
		

> 13R systems are for Residential Strucutures, hence the 'R'.  It was not intneded for use in Commercial strucutres dedicated primarily to ohter uses such as 'S' / 'A' / 'B' which are the uses normally found in Fire Stations.  If that were not he case, why would even have a standard other than NFPA13?


  Because sometimes the commercial uses of a building or structure require or benefit from a higher level of protection - 13R protects occupants who may be sleeping. 13 also protects structures, occupants who may be restrained, can be used in lieu of one hour fire protection, allows for additional square footage with a given construction type, etc.  In a fire station, the purpose of the sprinkler system is to allow sleeping occupants time to escape.

  The differential hazard levels between occupancies are addressed by fire separation or using the most restrictive construction requirements when occupancies are unseparated.


----------



## brudgers

mtlogcabin said:
			
		

> From the OP it is the shower the FC states will not be used by the public. I guess there has never been a fire fighter come back from a call with a twisted knee, sprained ankle or strained back or maybe just overly exhausted that may need or want a rail to hang onto so the don't slip or fall while getting cleaned up before seeking treatment


  Presumably the chief fires disabled personnel.


----------



## globe trekker

I have to claim lack of knowledge on all of this! I was hoping that some of the experienced

persons from the Fire Community (on here) would chime in to assist in the discussion.

In looking at the descriptions for the different Occupancy Groups (in the 2006 IBC), I

would interpret these fire stations to be an R-2. I am also curious as to what others

(specifically from the Fire Community) would interpret these fire stations as.

Coug Dad, ..FMWB, ..fireguy, ..cda, ..permitguy, others! :surr

.


----------



## mark handler

globe trekker said:
			
		

> I have to claim lack of knowledge on all of this!


Contact the Access Board or DOJ


----------



## Big Mac

Unfortunately, most of the fire service people I have come in contact with, say it is such and such because I said so, or you need to do that because I said so.  Very seldom do they let the code get in the way.  Unfortunate but true.  We are trying to change that perspective, but it's a constant battle.  On ewould think they would want to lead by example.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that is true of all fire service personnel, just the ones I come in contact with most often.


----------



## hlfireinspector

Just finshed building new station:

Bay S-1

Offices B

Living quarters R-2

Fully sprinklered NFPA 13


----------



## hlfireinspector

hlfireinspector said:
			
		

> Just finshed building new station:Bay S-1
> 
> Offices B
> 
> Living quarters R-2
> 
> Fully sprinklered NFPA 13


With handicapp bathroom in quarters (with shower) and in offices and front lobby (Yes 3)


----------



## Mac

^^^^^ (see above) Just the way it should be done.

Please refer to the facilities as "accessible" instead of "handicapp".


----------



## fireguy

globe trekker said:
			
		

> I have to claim lack of knowledge on all of this! I was hoping that some of the experiencedpersons from the Fire Community (on here) would chime in to assist in the discussion.
> 
> In looking at the descriptions for the different Occupancy Groups (in the 2006 IBC), I
> 
> would interpret these fire stations to be an R-2. I am also curious as to what others
> 
> (specifically from the Fire Community) would interpret these fire stations as.
> 
> Coug Dad, ..FMWB, ..fireguy, ..cda, ..permitguy, others! :surr
> 
> .


Our fire house was used for first aid classes, and Hunter's Ed classes.  We had people stopping by for social visits. Girl Scouts stopped to sell cookies.   Our kids stopped by so the girls could show us how pretty they were before the Prom. We also took the opportunity to  glare at the boyfriend.  We lived in the station for 24 hours at a time, it was our home away from home.

Trying to circumvent the building code sets a bad example.  If I knew local officials were trying to get around the codes, they would loose credibility with me.  Oh wait, they already do that.


----------



## globe trekker

hlfireinspector,

Are you stating that the fire stations ARE designated as an R-3

occupancy group?

(Sorry Mark, I couldn't resist the opportunity to clarify this

topic some more!  )

As an aside, ..ya'll wanted a Hot Topic, well this tater' seems to be

pretty hot!

.


----------



## Big Mac

Looks like hlfireinspector got it right and he clearly said R-2.  The only other associated occupancy category we typically see around here in fire stations is A-3.


----------



## globe trekker

My apologies if I offended anyone!  I mistakenly assumed that the " Yes 3 " was for

an Occupancy Group designation.  It appears to be for 3 separate Occupancies inside

their new fire station.

.


----------



## gbhammer

hlfireinspector said:
			
		

> Just finshed building new station:Bay S-1
> 
> Offices B
> 
> Living quarters R-2
> 
> Fully sprinklered NFPA 13


The last one we had go up was exactly like this except it was fire house/ambulance with helipad


----------



## Papio Bldg Dept

gbhammer said:
			
		

> The last one we had go up was exactly like this except it was fire house/ambulance with helipad


The original design for ours called out a climbing wall.  It didn't quite make the budget cuts.


----------



## gbhammer

The only thing that did not make the budget cuts was the underground storm water detention vault, that was going to be used for all non potable water in the building.


----------



## hlfireinspector

hlfireinspector said:
			
		

> With handicapp bathroom in quarters (with shower) and in offices and front lobby (Yes 3)


Yes 3 means three handicapp bathrooms in building and the one of the 5 in the bed hall has a handicapp shower. Now to drive point home we have a handicapp EMA director that works in building from 8-5 mon-friday.


----------



## mark handler

Three ACESSIBLE *bathrooms,* not required.

One of each "bathing facilities" shall be accessible (men/Women)

If a restroom is provided for the offices or for guests, "It or They" shall be accessible.


----------



## gbhammer

Mark I thought all bathing rooms had to be accessible?

2009 IBC

*1109.2 Toilet and bathing facilities.* Each toilet room and bathing

room shall be accessible.


----------



## mark handler

gbhammer said:
			
		

> Mark I thought all bathing rooms had to be accessible?2009 IBC
> 
> *1109.2 Toilet and bathing facilities.* Each toilet room and bathing
> 
> room shall be accessible.


The previous post indicated you need *three *"handicap" accessible bathrooms. You do not. How many "bathrooms" do you have?

Toilet rooms or restrooms are not the same as bathrooms or bathing facilities.

It's a matter of "semantics” is the real meaning is being lost in verbiage


----------



## Papio Bldg Dept

mark handler said:
			
		

> The previous post indicated you need *three *"handicap" accessible bathrooms. You do not. How many "bathrooms" do you have?Toilet rooms or restrooms are not the same as bathrooms or bathing facilities.
> 
> It's a matter of "semantics” is the real meaning is being lost in verbiage


The word "semantics" itself denotes a range of ideas, from the popular to the highly technical. It is often used in ordinary language to denote a problem of understanding that comes down to word selection or connotation. This problem of understanding has been the subject of many formal inquiries, over a long period of time, most notably in the field of formal semantics.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics

(sorry mark, i couldn't help myself.  i mean who doesn't just live to watch noam chomsky documentary on semantics...i know i do.  :insert guy with stick beating dead horse icon here


----------



## Builder Bob

I have my feeling (opinion) on this matter as well.... IF accessibility was manddated by the government and public taxpayer monies are being spent - and the public visits said firehouse (open house in october), then government buildings should be accessible period.

Not any different than


----------



## hlfireinspector

mark handler said:
			
		

> The previous post indicated you need *three *"handicap" accessible bathrooms. You do not. How many "bathrooms" do you have?Toilet rooms or restrooms are not the same as bathrooms or bathing facilities.
> 
> It's a matter of "semantics” is the real meaning is being lost in verbiage


Fire Station has seven "water closets" total. Three of these are accessible and one has accessible shower. The front lobby of the station has an accessible "water closet". The Fire bedhall has four water closets with showers one of which is accessible. The Battalion bed hall has a water closet. The office area also contains a small meeting room for public use and FD training and the water closet that servers this area is accessible. I did not say this many water closets was required but there is nothing wrong with going above the code requirements.


----------



## steveray

Soooooo.........Initial "concept" plans just came in for our new firehouse.....with a 1500sf mezzanine.......this is going to be fun......


----------



## mtlogcabin

> .......this is going to be fun......:smile:


Especially when you tell them the fire pole isn't code compliant:beatdhrs


----------



## mark handler

mtlogcabin said:
			
		

> Especially when you tell them the fire pole isn't code compliant:beatdhrs


The Pole does not need to be in compliance, "an" accessible POT does.


----------



## steveray

FURTHER COMPLICATING OUR ISSUES, WE HAVE.....

(Add) 1103.2.16 Mezzanines.  Mezzanines having fewer than 3,000 square feet of gross floor area, either singly or in the aggregate for multiple mezzanines on any floor are not required to be accessible and are not required to be located on an accessible route, provided that the goods and services available on any mezzanine shall be available in accessible areas.

Any ADA input on that Mark?


----------



## steveray

And further muddying the water....

STATE BUILDING CODE INTERPRETATION NO. I-10-12

March 23, 2012

The following is in response to your request for formal interpretation dated March 21, 2012.

Question:

If a building to be constructed is to be occupied as a fire department facility in a Connecticut municipality, is it excluded by the language of Section 1103.2.15 #2, from the 3,000 square foot exemption and therefore must provide accessibility for fire department personnel (firefighters) to the upper floors even if they are less than 3,000 square feet each?

Answer:

This code section is derived from Connecticut General Statute Section 29-274©, which is based on ADA language and which I cannot interpret, but I will give my opinion regarding the subject. Yes, firehouses have, in the past, been ruled to be a municipal building by this office and would be required to provide accessibility to an upper floor even though it is less than 3,000 square feet.


----------



## mark handler

steveray said:
			
		

> FURTHER COMPLICATING OUR ISSUES, WE HAVE.....(Add) 1103.2.16 Mezzanines.  Mezzanines having fewer than 3,000 square feet of gross floor area, either singly or in the aggregate for multiple mezzanines on any floor are not required to be accessible and are not required to be located on an accessible route, provided that the goods and services available on any mezzanine shall be available in accessible areas.
> 
> Any ADA input on that Mark?


You have a general rule, for general occupancies, that says less than 3,000 sf, accessibility not required and you have specific interpretations and requirements that says it does.

I would say follow the specific interpretations and requirements. Access required for firestations.


----------



## mtlogcabin

mark handler said:
			
		

> The Pole does not need to be in compliance, "an" accessible POT does.


Your right it is that big hole in the floor that needs a 42" guard around it and maybe even a fire rated opening protect between the uses they really don't like


----------



## mark handler

mtlogcabin said:
			
		

> Your right it is that big hole in the floor that needs a 42" guard around it and maybe even a fire rated opening protect between the uses they really don't like


http://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_table=INTERPRETATIONS&p_id=20688


----------



## mtlogcabin

What does osha have to do with the building code requirement?


----------



## mark handler

They have authority over workplace areas and conditions

people keep claiming it is a workplace area


----------



## Indimana

The Fire Chief has not fully thought through his staff and buildings value to his community.

When a disaster happens in his jurisdiction (since the building is built to a higher importance factor than those surounding it) hundreds of homeless will be looking for aid at his (thier) fire station. This will include disabled (maybe as a result of the disaster (Somthing to think about - along with the volumes of cases already noted).


----------

