ADA compliance requires sidewalks less than 60” to have passing zones every 200 feet. Which is why USUALLY you’ll just have a 60” wide sidewalk. 36” is the bareminimum for ADA compliance. So. That.
The one you’re showing would simply not be compliant in some states and unless they’re counting the driveways as “passing zones” idk how this meets ADA compliance
They are brand new modern sidewalks that exceed international standards.
60” sidewalks aren’t a thing.
Are you confusing footpaths and sidewalks like the other user is too? They’re totally different things, and all footpaths in the city are 2.4m and changing 4m.
I provided you the exact specifications from ADA, they say 36” lol.
And maybe where you are, they are thing, but not here since they would break every winter. So that’s why the ADA doesn’t have requirements that wide, since some states are frost states.
It’s almost like our infrastructure is designed for our location or something….
You’re obviously conflating things, since ADA is 36”, what agency are you thinking of instead? Because the ADA is exceeded by our model building code. So your claims are just fucking wild at this point. They wouldn’t build something that doesn’t meet or exceed the code minimum. Are you just making shit up for fun now?
Provide the ADA requirement that states what you’re thinking. This is part of my job, I can look it up and take a picture of the code book for you. If you can be arsed to provide the code reference #?
You’re just repeating what I’m saying from the opposite position.
We’re calling that 36” bare minimum sidewalk tiny, and you’re taking umbrage to it. I’m saying it barely meets the requirement and you’re saying it meets the requirement so it’s sufficient. Yes, the same thing said differently except per you 60” sidewalks aren’t the norm which has everyone calling the ones you linked out.
I live in a frost state. Im not interested in arguing what the requirement is since we both agreed it’s 36” you’re just arguing about the 60” landing requirement. Which is fine. I don’t care, sorry to twist your panties.
You’re the one that’s saying it doesn’t meet ada requirements, and I’m trying to explain that they quite literally do. And the context of the road doesn’t require larger sidewalks like other places, but 60”+ is no longer a sidewalk and follows different construction protocols.
A 4” thick slab over 48” can’t support a vehicle for driveways where there is frost movement. So they only build them where needed or required since the city wholly pays the cost, and taxpayers get a say in how public money is spent in that regard.
If you didn’t have your head so far up your ass thinking you’re correct, maybe you could learn something. And frost doesn’t just mean it gets below freezing, it quite literally means your ground is frozen for months at a time.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but someone correcting incorrect information doesn’t have their panties in a twist.
So like, technically a sidewalk but that sidewalk is gonna be embarrassed af in gym class
It exceeds international standards. What the hell are you basing it off of?
International bare minimums maybe. I’m used to 1.5m but sounds like even 1.2m is more of a standard than 1.0m
Can barely even walk beside/past someone comfortably with 1.0m wide sidewalks
ADA compliance requires sidewalks less than 60” to have passing zones every 200 feet. Which is why USUALLY you’ll just have a 60” wide sidewalk. 36” is the bare minimum for ADA compliance. So. That.
The one you’re showing would simply not be compliant in some states and unless they’re counting the driveways as “passing zones” idk how this meets ADA compliance
ADA has no such requirements, and can be reduced down to 32” in places.
They are brand new modern sidewalks that exceed international standards.
60” sidewalks aren’t a thing.
Are you confusing footpaths and sidewalks like the other user is too? They’re totally different things, and all footpaths in the city are 2.4m and changing 4m.
You have to atleast compare the same things here.
I have 60” sidewalks in front of my house and all throughout my city.
When sidewalks reduce to 32” they are required to have a passing zone of 60” minimum every 200’
Maybe there’s a carve out for private communities, but your sidewalk here is definitely not ADA compliant.
The PROWAG is even more stringent at 48” minimumsz
I provided you the exact specifications from ADA, they say 36” lol.
And maybe where you are, they are thing, but not here since they would break every winter. So that’s why the ADA doesn’t have requirements that wide, since some states are frost states.
It’s almost like our infrastructure is designed for our location or something….
You’re obviously conflating things, since ADA is 36”, what agency are you thinking of instead? Because the ADA is exceeded by our model building code. So your claims are just fucking wild at this point. They wouldn’t build something that doesn’t meet or exceed the code minimum. Are you just making shit up for fun now?
Provide the ADA requirement that states what you’re thinking. This is part of my job, I can look it up and take a picture of the code book for you. If you can be arsed to provide the code reference #?
You’re just repeating what I’m saying from the opposite position.
We’re calling that 36” bare minimum sidewalk tiny, and you’re taking umbrage to it. I’m saying it barely meets the requirement and you’re saying it meets the requirement so it’s sufficient. Yes, the same thing said differently except per you 60” sidewalks aren’t the norm which has everyone calling the ones you linked out.
I live in a frost state. Im not interested in arguing what the requirement is since we both agreed it’s 36” you’re just arguing about the 60” landing requirement. Which is fine. I don’t care, sorry to twist your panties.
You’re the one that’s saying it doesn’t meet ada requirements, and I’m trying to explain that they quite literally do. And the context of the road doesn’t require larger sidewalks like other places, but 60”+ is no longer a sidewalk and follows different construction protocols.
A 4” thick slab over 48” can’t support a vehicle for driveways where there is frost movement. So they only build them where needed or required since the city wholly pays the cost, and taxpayers get a say in how public money is spent in that regard.
If you didn’t have your head so far up your ass thinking you’re correct, maybe you could learn something. And frost doesn’t just mean it gets below freezing, it quite literally means your ground is frozen for months at a time.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but someone correcting incorrect information doesn’t have their panties in a twist.
Just to be clear, again.
I have 60” sidewalks in front of my house, in a frost state.
You and I both agree your 36” sidewalks are the Minimum requirement
I’m not sure what you’re on about, your sidewalk is small which is why we all noticed