Hello. Please sign in!
Dan Woosley

Caution regarding minimum Aisle Widths for aisles that serve "elements on both sides"

General Comment or Question

Re: 2013 California Standards for Accessible Design Pocket Guide / 11B-403.5.1 Clear width

Dan Woosley | August 14, 2015 at 5:08PM (edited)

As a heads up, care should be taken in applying the technical aspects of 11B-403.5.1, Exception 4 re: minimum aisle width in California. The interpretation of the meaning of aisles "serving elements on both sides" might be taken by some AHJs to mean public access to aisles that have self-serve items on both sides of an aisle in, say, a Mercantile Group M Occupancy, vs. what we have understood it to mean: the clear width related to egress when a Main Aisle is fed by feeder aisles (also known as 'Range Aisles') on both sides of the Main Aisle (thereby needing the wider aisle to accommodate more people).  Verify with the AHJ before locking into a plan layout.  The difference may trigger a 44" minimum aisle width vs. a 36" minimum aisle width.

Related Keywords

Related Section Numbers

Reply

Accurate: 100% (1 votes)

Helpful: 100% (2 votes)

Message 1 of 2

Soojin Hur

DSA-AC definition

General Comment or Question

Re: 2013 California Standards for Accessible Design Pocket Guide / 11B-403.5.1 Clear width

Soojin Hur | October 12, 2015 at 7:10PM (edited)

Mr. Woosley,

DSA-AC's definition of the "AISLE" seems to clearly include those merchandise aisles and even aisles within dining facilities. Is there still a room for interpretation? Have you seen some cities enforce this exception strictly or has it been more applicable to means of egress condition?

Related Keywords

Related Section Numbers

Attachments:

  • Aisle.JPG
Reply

Accurate: N/A (0 votes)

Helpful: N/A (0 votes)

Message 2 of 2

[MORE INFO...]

*You must sign in to view [MORE INFO...]