ADA Accessible Playground Calculator

Because §240.2.2 sets a flat percentage, not a step table: "Where elevated play components are provided, at least 50 percent shall be on an accessible route." Table 240.2.1.2 -- the table with rows like "20-22 needs 7" and "over 25 needs 8 plus 1 per additional 3" -- governs a different requirement entirely (see the next question), so it never touches Accessible Elevated Components. At 10 elevated components (this calculator's default) that's 5 required; at 100, it's 50 -- always rounded up to the next whole component.

Yes, through Table 240.2.1.2 (§240.2.1.2), a requirement layered on top of the simple "one of each type" rule (§240.2.1.1). Accessible Ground-Level Components is the LARGER of the two: the type-count cap, or the table's elevated-count-keyed value. So at this calculator's defaults (5 ground-level components, 3 types, 10 elevated), the type rule gives 3 and the table (8-10 elevated -> 3) also gives 3 -- they agree here, but with more elevated components the table can pull the requirement well ABOVE what a site currently has. Per the U.S. Access Board's own worked example: "In some cases, the accessibility guidelines will require additional play components to be provided." At 5 ground-level components and 100 elevated components, the table requires 33 -- far more than the 5 that exist -- and this calculator reports that directly as Additional Ground Components Required (28 in that example) and a Ground Accessibility (%) of 660% (33/5), not a value artificially capped at 5 or 100%: you can't reach compliance by re-routing existing components alone, new ones must be built.

Not once Total Ground-Level Components catches up with Distinct Ground-Level Types AND the Table 240.2.1.2 value driven by Total Elevated Components -- Accessible Ground-Level Components is capped by whichever of those two is larger, not by an endless climb. With 4 distinct types, 10 elevated components (table value 3), and 8 total ground-level components, the requirement is 4 either way, and adding a 9th or 10th component of a type you already have doesn't move it. It only rises further by adding another distinct TYPE, or by adding enough elevated components to push the table value past the type count. Note that Accessible Ground-Level Components itself is NOT capped at how many ground-level components exist -- if Table 240.2.1.2's value (driven by Total Elevated Components) exceeds Total Ground-Level Components, the requirement can legitimately call for more components than the site has today, which is exactly what Additional Ground Components Required and a Ground Accessibility (%) above 100% are reporting.

Because they answer unrelated ADA questions. Elevation Change (ft) only measures how much a ramp along the accessible route needs to climb, which drives Ramp Run Needed (ft), Ramp Landings Required, and the surfacing area and cost built from them. Accessible Ground-Level Components is governed by §240.2.1's "one of each type" rule and Table 240.2.1.2's elevated-count-keyed rule, neither of which has anything to do with site grade -- a perfectly flat playground and a steeply sloped one with the same ground-level and elevated component counts need the identical number of accessible ground-level components.

Est. Accessible Surfacing Cost ($) covers three separate areas added together: the accessible route itself (Accessible Route Length (ft) at a flat 5 ft width), any ramp needed to handle Elevation Change (ft) at ADA's 1:12 max slope (also 5 ft wide), and the level landings that ramp requires (one roughly every 30 ft of ramp run, at 25 sq ft each). All three are priced together at roughly $14/sq ft, a typical poured-in-place rubber rate -- the same firm, stable, slip-resistant surfacing ADA requires along accessible routes.