Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Accessibility topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee finds IRC does not explicitly limit slope of adult-family-home ramp landings; refers opinion to full council for study
Summary
The BRFW committee concluded the IRC lacks explicit language addressing cross slope or maximum slope for ramp landings at adult family homes, noted DSHS checklists may contain a 2% (1:48) landing guidance, and voted to refer a formal opinion and supporting evidence to the full council for more research and stakeholder input.
The Building Code CouncilBRFW panel reviewed a draft opinion on whether the Washington State Residential Code limits the maximum slope of a landing at the bottom of a ramp serving an adult family home and concluded the IRC does not explicitly address landing slope.
Jenny Nickerson, the proponent of the interpretation request, said she found no clear IRC provision limiting landing slope for ramps and noted DSHS materials reference ramp-landing slope for licensing. "Based on my reading of r311.8, there does not appear to be specificity with regard to the maximum slope of the landing," she said.
Committee members noted related accessibility standards (referencing typical 2%/1:48 guidance) and that DSHS checklists used in AFH licensing include landing-slope language in an initial-inspection checklist posted in April 2025. Contractors and care providers testified that rigidly requiring a level pad at the bottom of a ramp that lands on an existing sloped driveway can create unsafe transitions and large construction costs; one contractor described blending ramps into driveways as the safer practical approach in many retrofit situations.
Staff and members recommended additional technical research and outreach to DSHS, home-health practitioners and local building inspectors before issuing a formal opinion. The committee moved to refer the draft opinion and supporting materials to the full council for action and to invite DSHS and caregiving/home-health representatives to present evidence at the council meeting; the motion passed by voice vote.
Why it matters: For adult family homes (residential facilities with licensing), clarity about ramp-landing slope affects safety, licensing, and construction practice for retrofit and new builds. Where IRC is silent, local jurisdictions and licensing agencies may interpret requirements differently; the committee suggested bridging that gap with clearer guidance or potential code change.
What comes next: Committee staff will coordinate with DSHS, gather contractor and caregiver input (photos, videos) and present an amended opinion or proposed code language to the full council at its next meeting.
