We hold that the loading dock is part of defendant's boiler building and therefore reverse the summary disposition granted in favor of defendant. Further, the exceptions to a governmental entity's immunity from tort liability when performing a governmental function are narrowly drawn. In Ali , supra at 584-585, we held that a bus shelter was a building because it was a walled structure with a roof designed to protect people from inclement weather. While it is not necessary for us to resolve these hypothetical situations in the case at bar, we note that an outside overhang is a danger presented by a physical condition of a building itself and that some stairs also may fit the test we adopted today if they are truly part of the building itself . In the present case, defendant's boiler building contains an elevated entrance that is serviced by the loading dock.
Defendant admits the loading dock was part of the building's original blueprints.
Further, ingress and egress to the back of the building would not be possible without the loading dock. Under these circumstances, extending the reasoning of the majority in Horace, supra , we hold that the loading dock is part of defendant's boiler building. The loading dock is an essential part of defendant's boiler building and therefore part of the building itself. For these reasons, we hold that the building exception to governmental immunity applies and accordingly reverse the lower court. Reverse and remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.