# Indoor play equipment accessibility



## cburgess (Nov 23, 2021)

In my role as a state building official, a dispute has come to our attention over an accessibility issue. I'd like others' thoughts on it.

A new two-story school building for small children is under construction. A portion of the building's first floor is open through the second floor to the roof. On the second floor, that open-to-below area is bound by a compliant guard railing. The designer has placed a tubular spiral playground slide in that open area, from the second floor down to the first. It is accessed by a hole in the second floor guard rail system. There is an elevator to the second floor located immediately adjacent to the slide.

The local official has cited this slide as not complying with the building code's Section 1103.1 for general accessibility (our current code is based on the 2012 model). He has provided no information as to how he believes it falls short of the mark.

So the questions before me are these:

Is the device really noncompliant with 1103.1? There's an elevator to the top.
If it really is noncompliant, does that presuppose that an accessible version exists, or that one can be created? And how would it be different? What does an accessible tubular spiral slide look like? Or would it simply need to be removed completely?
The building code doesn't regulate outdoor playgrounds. Does it regulate indoor ones?
How is this device any different from a piece of furniture that's ungoverned by the code? It's not a part of the building in the same way a doorway or set of stairs are.
Keep in mind this has nothing at all to do with ADA. There may well be ADA implications, but they're not for me to consider. Our rules and enforcement authority are limited strictly to state regulations, and those are the building codes. All I can consider is the code and, by reference, the ICC/ANSI A117.1-2009 regulations.

Thanks in advance for any thoughts you might have.


----------



## classicT (Nov 23, 2021)

My take on the A117.1 regulation is that it requires an accessible route to the components. It does not require that the components be fully accessible. I would further say that a slide is an elevated play component, and therefore the only real code section from the A117.1 is _1108.3.2.2_.

As an elevator is provided, the slide is on an accessible route.

*1108.3.2.2 Elevated Play Components*
Where elevated play components are provided, at least 50 percent shall be on an accessible route and shall comply with Section 1108.4.3.


----------



## JPohling (Nov 23, 2021)

I agree with classic.  Ask for the specific code section that is in violation.


----------



## ADAguy (Nov 24, 2021)

Here we have an insensitivity issue. It may not be in code/ANSI but the experience cannot be denied to those with disabilities. 
Swings have been adapted for WC users, this must be too or face the consequences of a parent.


----------



## classicT (Nov 24, 2021)

ADAguy said:


> Here we have an insensitivity issue. It may not be in code/ANSI but the experience cannot be denied to those with disabilities.
> Swings have been adapted for WC users, this must be too or face the consequences of a parent.


Sensitivity issues are not up to a local code official. Code officials should stick to the code; that's the job.

Aside from the "insensitivity" and the "consequences of a parent", what would you suggest? Every slide in the world be made accessible? Not even remotely possible. The nature of a slide requires that it be confined to a limited space for the safety of the slider. I can't imagine what would be necessary to make a slide fully accessible.

Accessibility is about providing as many accommodations as possible, within reason. Accessibility is not intend to fix the world, but to show grace and understanding to those with mobility limitations.

Sorry for the rant... but saying "the experience cannot be denied to those with disabilities" is wrong. We (the world, code officials, etc.) are attempting to show the grace and understanding I mentioned, but it needs to be reasonable and should not remove the ability for those without a disability to enjoy a fixture or feature.

The answer should never be, it is not accessible and therefore it is not allowed. Almost becomes a reverse form of discrimination at that point. Instead we should aim for, it is not accessible, therefore what is the maximum extent I can provide for accessible use.


----------



## Yikes (Nov 24, 2021)

ADAguy said:


> Here we have an insensitivity issue. It may not be in code/ANSI but the experience cannot be denied to those with disabilities.
> Swings have been adapted for WC users, this must be too or face the consequences of a parent.


I've seen slides for wheelchairs all over the place.  They're called "ramps".

With 8.33% slope and ANSI-compliant slip resistance, they're not much of a "slide" experience.


----------



## ICE (Nov 24, 2021)

cburgess said:


> A new two-story school building for small children is under construction. A portion of the building's first floor is open through the second floor to the roof. On the second floor, that open-to-below area is bound by a compliant guard railing. .


The guard is compliant until it gets to the opening for the slide.  At that point it is not a compliant guard.


----------



## MtnArch (Nov 24, 2021)

Although I appreciate ADAguy's comments, I have to agree with classicT and Yikes on this - unfortunately (as hard as we may (or may not) try) there is no way to accommodate both able and disabled with everything.  It may seem like a callous comment, but as I've reminded my kids over the years - "If someone told you that life is fair .. they lied to you."  There simply will be areas that the disabled will not be able to experience in the same way as others - but if all we ever do is focus on the negative, we will miss so much of what IS available to be enjoyed and experienced by all.


----------



## classicT (Nov 29, 2021)

ICE said:


> The guard is compliant until it gets to the opening for the slide.  At that point it is not a compliant guard.


Technically, with an enclosed slide, there is not a 30" drop within 36" of the opening. I'm not sure if there is an official standard for slides, but most that are more than 5-6-ft off the ground are the fully enclosed tube type. I would argue that a tube, being fully enclosed is not an issue for a guard. Now install a traditional non-tube, U-shaped slide, and I think that there is a fall hazard if the slide transitions between stories.


----------



## steveray (Nov 29, 2021)

To go with ICE....If the tube isn't 42" tall...It would not qualify as a guard....Shirley I wouldn't call it a drop though...


----------



## classicT (Nov 29, 2021)

steveray said:


> To go with ICE....If the tube isn't 42" tall...It would not qualify as a guard....Shirley I wouldn't call it a drop though...









I'd imagine that it should look something like this. The guard is continuous around and above the slide opening.


----------



## classicT (Nov 29, 2021)

Or this... (Berlin Mall)


----------



## bill1952 (Nov 29, 2021)

My mom taught in a small school that had a slide like that - straight - from second floor to first - on exterior. Fire escape of course.  Don't know if they used if for fun or just fire drills.

Kind of beyond maximum ramp slope.....


----------



## steveray (Nov 29, 2021)

I used to go down between the escalators in the malls...best slide ever.......They have speed bumps now....


----------



## fatboy (Nov 29, 2021)

I ran into this with a rec pool we built years ago, and I got over agonizing on it. Accessible route ended at the slide base. That's been about 16 years now, never had heard a word about it, still in the same jurisdiction, heck, they made me the CBO right after that!


----------



## tbz (Nov 30, 2021)

ICE said:


> The guard is compliant until it gets to the opening for the slide.  At that point it is not a compliant guard.


How do you get there without inspecting or seeing the slide or plans?

The slide is not a walking surface and if the sitting portion of the slide does not descend 30" within 36" of the opening, there is no issue if it is an enclosed or has compliant guards on the sides of the slides for the first 3ft. 

Also remember everyone, the OP noted, not in his authority to enforce FEDERAL ADA Laws.

Stay to the parameters of the question.


----------



## tmurray (Nov 30, 2021)

classicT said:


> Technically, with an enclosed slide, there is not a 30" drop within 36" of the opening. I'm not sure if there is an official standard for slides, but most that are more than 5-6-ft off the ground are the fully enclosed tube type. I would argue that a tube, being fully enclosed is not an issue for a guard. Now install a traditional non-tube, U-shaped slide, and I think that there is a fall hazard if the slide transitions between stories.


I was going to say the same thing, but our code also has a slope requirement that needs met as well. Code here is that a guard is required over 24". If you have a slope of 1 in 2 for the first 4' from the walking plane (same 2' difference), a guard would be required as well. The slide would obviously not meet the slope requirement. 

I feel this does create a judgement call for the official. Does the slide create a hazardous condition? No. not anymore than any other slide outside where it would be unregulated. It is probably safer given that the environmental exposure has been eliminated.


----------



## tmurray (Nov 30, 2021)

We've seen these in a couple of houses and looked at it as specialized equipment outside of the scope of the code. I make sure that there are suitable guards around it, but I don't inspect it, or its supporting structure.


----------



## mtlogcabin (Nov 30, 2021)

A slide is exempt IMHO under Chapter 11 of the IBC.I believe an enclosed slide meets the intent of 1110.4.8

1103.1 Where required.
Sites, buildings, structures, facilities, elements and spaces, temporary or permanent, shall be accessible to individuals with disabilities.

1110.1 General.
Recreational facilities shall be provided with accessible features in accordance with Sections 1110.2 through 1110.4.

1110.4.8 Amusement rides.
Amusement rides that move persons through a fixed course within a defined area shall comply with Sections 1110.4.8.1 through 1110.4.8.3.

*1110.4.8.3 Minimum number.
Amusement rides shall provide at least one wheelchair space, amusement ride seat designed for transfer or transfer device.

Exceptions:*

1.    Amusement rides that are controlled or operated by the rider are not required to comply with this section.

2.    Amusement rides designed primarily for children, where children are assisted on and off the ride by an adult, are not required to comply with this section.

*3.    Amusement rides that do not provide seats that are built-in or mechanically fastened shall not be required to comply with this section.

No seats no requirement IMHO*


----------



## classicT (Nov 30, 2021)

mtlogcabin said:


> A slide is exempt IMHO under Chapter 11 of the IBC.I believe an enclosed slide meets the intent of 1110.4.8
> 
> 1103.1 Where required.
> Sites, buildings, structures, facilities, elements and spaces, temporary or permanent, shall be accessible to individuals with disabilities.
> ...



I like the idea, but to call a slide an amusement ride is quite a stretch.

Keep it simple, call it an elevated piece of play equipment, which is a much more accurate depiction of a slide. _IBC Section 1110.4.13_ says "Play areas containing play components designed and constructed for children shall be located on an accessible route." Follow that through with a trip to the A117.1 standard and see _A117.1 Section 1108.3.2.2_, where all that is required is the accessible route to the play component.



classicT said:


> My take on the A117.1 regulation is that it requires an accessible route to the components. It does not require that the components be fully accessible. I would further say that a slide is an elevated play component, and therefore the only real code section from the A117.1 is _1108.3.2.2_.
> 
> As an elevator is provided, the slide is on an accessible route.
> 
> ...


----------



## ADAguy (Dec 7, 2021)

classicT said:


> Or this... (Berlin Mall)


Seriously? What of obese users?


----------



## classicT (Dec 7, 2021)

ADAguy said:


> Seriously? What of obese users?


What of them?


----------



## cburgess (Dec 8, 2021)

For those following this, it turned out kind of strangely in the end. When I was researching it, I found that there are in fact accessibility regulations for the slide in A117.1-2009, but for some reason the Fire Prevention and Building Safety Commission deleted them when they promulgated and adopted our current building code, something the local official also discovered when I asked him to explain to me precisely how the slide fails to meet accessibility requirements. That led him to vacate the violation order, which eliminated the dispute between him and the design team, which in turn disqualified his request for an interpretation. So in the end I didn't have to issue an official interpretation on the issue. For now, anyway. I'm sure it'll come up again sometime.


----------



## ADAguy (Dec 8, 2021)

Diameter of tube is still a limit as to size of user, just like a seat in a commercial airplane limits a users size.


----------



## creativerecreational (May 11, 2022)

I am imagining what this playground equipment gonna look like, haha. Well, you should ask the guards for this and look up for the code that is in violation.


----------



## ADAguy (May 13, 2022)

These are appearing on cruise ships but ships are moveable and not fixed.


----------



## George Barnes (Jun 3, 2022)

There many facets to code application, some feasible while others not as much. The important concept is how to achieve a reasonable balance, hence the term "reasonable accommodation". Has an alternative but similar experience that is technically feasible been considered for impaired individuals to use? If there is no such feasible means, then it would seem as the code official that required due diligence has been performed. Good luck.


----------

