# Maneuvering clearance at adjaect doors



## pmarx

ICC/ANSI A117.1-2003

Is a door permitted to swing onto the maneuvering clearance of an adjacent door? The only thing I can find is 304.4 (door swinging into turning space) and 603.2.2 (doors swinging into toilet fixture floor space.) Neither applies to my question. Thanks.


----------



## Papio Bldg Dept

404.2.3 and 404.2.5 (doors in series) are the applicable A117.1-2003 Sections.  Maneuvering Clearance at Doors and Turning Spaces are two distinct issues.   Yes, another door swing may encroach the maneuvering clearance of another, or adjacent door(s). Door swings may not encroach fixture clear floor spaces.


----------



## Papio Bldg Dept

Correction:  Door swings may encroach fixture clear floor spaces in toilet rooms based upon the two exception listed in 603.2.3.

I miss the edit button.


----------



## Pcinspector1

2009 edition A117.1 AS, allows DOORS maneuvering clearances into the permitted overlap.

Doors is pluralized.

pc1


----------



## Pcinspector1

Papio, I miss the edit button too!

pc1


----------



## mark handler

Are the doors in series? And are both doors a part of an accessible route?

The provisions for doors and doorways are applicable only for doors that are part of an accessible route. Doors that are not part of an accessible route need not comply with the provisions.

Because both doors and doorways may create obstructions that would interfere with movement along an accessible route, the standard requires that they comply with the provisions found within the section.

Doors in series need four feet between them


----------



## pmarx

Thanks for everyone's replies. No, the doors aren't in series, they're perpendicular to each other. Sorry I didn't clarify that.


----------



## pmarx

To further clarify, it isn't necessary to go through one to go through the other.


----------



## mark handler

pmarx said:
			
		

> To further clarify, it isn't necessary to go through one to go through the other.


the definition of doors in series


----------



## mark handler

A door swinging onto the maneuvering clearance of an adjacent door

Though not prohibited, it is not good design.

The user of one door could hinder or in extreme cases, be injured by the user of the other door.

I would try to avoid that design, and just because it is not prohibited, does not mean the designer will not be sued, if injuries occur


----------



## Papio Bldg Dept

mark handler said:
			
		

> A door swinging onto the maneuvering clearance of an adjacent doorThough not prohibited, it is not good design.
> 
> The user of one door could hinder or in extreme cases, be injured by the user of the other door.
> 
> I would try to avoid that design, and just because it is not prohibited, does not mean the designer will not be sued, if injuries occur


have there been cases of designers being successfully sued (I assume you are talking about being sued under the ADA, and not contractually between the owner/tenant and the designer) for a permitted, yet not good, design that resulted in injuries?


----------



## mark handler

Papio Bldg Dept said:
			
		

> have there been cases of designers being successfully sued (I assume you are talking about being sued under the ADA, and not contractually between the owner/tenant and the designer) for a permitted, yet not good, design that resulted in injuries?


There have there been cases of designers being successfully sued, I don't know about "for injuries".

Most E&O insurers would settle.

Regardless it is a poor design


----------



## Pcinspector1

I guess my first thought was a bathroom door swinging into a bathroom and the janitors door on the 90 degree wall side that could be opened into the accessible path.

pc1


----------



## mark handler

Pcinspector1 said:
			
		

> I guess my first thought was a bathroom door swinging into a bathroom and the janitors door on the 90 degree wall side that could be opened into the accessible path. pc1


The provisions for doors and doorways are applicable only for doors that are part of an accessible route.

Doors that are not part of an accessible route need not comply with the provisions.


----------



## pmarx

Thanks for the replies. I’m not the designer. I was just trying to see if I missed something that prohibited the layout for this renovation project (in which optimal design practices are not always possible). He is concerned about someone getting hit by one of the doors which happens to be a pair of doors so he’s going to use automatic flush bolts on the leaf that could be a problem. The adjacent door serves a single occupant toilet room. Is it possible someone could get hit when the fire alarm goes off? I suppose so. Just as possible for occupants to run into each other as they converge through openings that don’t have doors.


----------



## Stanovby

I have this same question. It is a toilet room where the clear floor space of the entry door overlaps the swing of the accessible stall. Am i understanding correctly that this works for accessibility? This is existing construction so i am just trying to determine if this complies with ada.



			
				mark handler said:
			
		

> A door swinging onto the maneuvering clearance of an adjacent doorThough not prohibited, it is not good design.
> 
> The user of one door could hinder or in extreme cases, be injured by the user of the other door.
> 
> I would try to avoid that design, and just because it is not prohibited, does not mean the designer will not be sued, if injuries occur


----------



## mark handler

Door swings should not interfere with an accessible path of travel or clearances unless it is a single occupancy toilet.


----------



## Francis Vineyard

Stanovby said:
			
		

> I have this same question. It is a toilet room where the clear floor space of the entry door overlaps the swing of the accessible stall. Am i understanding correctly that this works for accessibility? This is existing construction so i am just trying to determine if this complies with ada.


Section 604.8.3 toilet compartment door shall comply with section 404; the accessible route to the toilet compartment for two doors in series applies.

I suppose anything is possible to have a stall (toilet compartment) inside of a water closet for the exception in accordance with 603.2.3 but it would not be required.


----------



## Stanovby

i talked to my boss about this & he says that this is ok with ADA. Obviously its not a good design but in my case we try to err on the side of compliance versus non compliance. My boss tells me that they are more worried about the fixture clear floor space because you will be parked there with your back to the door versus approaching the toilet stall door. I don't think the door in series applies in this case because you are not necessarily going from door to door. For instance, you could enter the toilet room & go directly to the lavatory. We could be mistaken, but my boss is the architect so its his name on the dotted line.



			
				Francis Vineyard said:
			
		

> Section 604.8.3 toilet compartment door shall comply with section 404; the accessible route to the toilet compartment for two doors in series applies.I suppose anything is possible to have a stall (toilet compartment) inside of a water closet for the exception in accordance with 603.2.3 but it would not be required.


----------



## mark handler

Stanovby said:
			
		

> i talked to my boss about this & he says that this is ok with ADA. ....the architect so its his name on the dotted line.


About 60 percent of the architects I know, and I is one, don't know squat about ADA compliance....


----------



## Stanovby

We deal with it quite a lot at my office. We even had a guy come in who teaches this stuff to train us. My boss thinks he knows it pretty well so i'm forced to defer to him. He likes to remind me that he signs my check if i argue with him too much. It's his baby so if he says it works it works as far as our company goes. If there are any problems it's on him. I still have questions which is why i joined this site. It seems like reading ada is like reading the constitution. There's a lot of room for interpretation.



			
				mark handler said:
			
		

> About 60 percent of the architects I know, and I is one, don't know squat about ADA compliance....


----------

