Changes After CO - Accessibility

[jar546]

A four unit apartment building has a major renovation which includes a new parking lot in front. The plans clearly show a handicap accessible spot per the state accessibility code. After the CO is issued, the owner of the apartment building removes the ADA parking signage and paints over the handicap symbol to make this a regular parking spot.

Do you have any authority to have this corrected in your jurisdiction?

 

[classicT]

Yes... this work was not exempt from a permit per IBC 105.2.

 

[jar546]

Yes... this work was not exempt from a permit per IBC 105.2.

Ok, let's do scenario #2. This is a same result of non-compliance but for a different reason:

In this case while driving by you notice that it is non-compliant and no markings were covered up but it is still not compliant per the approved drawings but you discover that one of your inspectors missed it at final and signed off on a non-compliant installation.

Does that change your response?

 

[steveray]

A four unit apartment building has a major renovation which includes a new parking lot in front. The plans clearly show a handicap accessible spot per the state accessibility code. After the CO is issued, the owner of the apartment building removes the ADA parking signage and paints over the handicap symbol to make this a regular parking spot.

Do you have any authority to have this corrected in your jurisdiction?

[A] 102.6 Existing Structures​

The legal use and occupancy of any building or structure existing on the date of adoption of this code shall be permitted to continue without change, except as otherwise specifically provided in this code, the 2021 International Existing Building Code portion of the 2022 Connecticut State Building Code or the 2022 Connecticut State Fire Safety Code.

[A] 114.1 Unlawful Acts
It shall be unlawful for any person, firm or corporation to erect, construct, alter, extend, repair, move, remove, demolish or occupy any building, structure or equipment regulated by this code, or cause same to be done, in conflict with or in violation of any of the provisions of this code.

 

[mtlogcabin]

File a complaint with Fair Housing and let them handle it. They might find others issues with the complex or its management that you do not have the authority to "look into"

 

[khsmith55]

File a complaint with Fair Housing and let them handle it. They might find others issues with the complex or its management that you do not have the authority to "look into"

Like this approach, but let the owner know first pointing out other deficiencies may be found. Bet the markings and signage comeback quickly.

 

[Yankee Chronicler]

Do you have any authority to have this corrected in your jurisdiction?

If we push it, yes.

[A] 101.2 Scope. The provisions of this code shall apply to
the construction, alteration, movement, enlargement,
replacement, repair, equipment, use and occupancy, location,
maintenance, removal and demolition of every building
or structure or any appurtenances connected or attached to
such buildings or structures.

The accessible parking was a requirement to obtain the building permit and to obtain the certificate of occupancy. Removing the accessible parking invalidates the CofO.

[A] 114.1 Unlawful acts. It shall be unlawful for any person,
firm or corporation to erect, construct, alter, extend, repair,
move, remove, demolish or occupy any building, structure or
equipment regulated by this code, or cause same to be done,
in conflict with or in violation of any of the provisions of this
code.

 

[classicT]

Ok, let's do scenario #2. This is a same result of non-compliance but for a different reason:

In this case while driving by you notice that it is non-compliant and no markings were covered up but it is still not compliant per the approved drawings but you discover that one of your inspectors missed it at final and signed off on a non-compliant installation.

Does that change your response?

No. Maybe changes the code section I'd reference, but that is it.

2018 IBC [A] 110.1 General​

Construction or work for which a permit is required shall be subject to inspection by the building official and such construction or work shall remain visible and able to be accessed for inspection purposes until approved. Approval as a result of an inspection shall not be construed to be an approval of a violation of the provisions of this code or of other ordinances of the jurisdiction. Inspections presuming to give authority to violate or cancel the provisions of this code or of other ordinances of the jurisdiction shall not be valid. It shall be the duty of the owner or the owner's authorized agent to cause the work to remain visible and able to be accessed for inspection purposes. Neither the building official nor the jurisdiction shall be liable for expense entailed in the removal or replacement of any material required to allow inspection.

 

[steveray]

Ok, let's do scenario #2. This is a same result of non-compliance but for a different reason:

In this case while driving by you notice that it is non-compliant and no markings were covered up but it is still not compliant per the approved drawings but you discover that one of your inspectors missed it at final and signed off on a non-compliant installation.

Does that change your response?

It would soften the approach for sure....

 

[jar546]

It would soften the approach for sure....

Soften, yes, I agree but still approach for compliance.

 

[Mr. Inspector]

We do not use Chapter 1 in PA. Painting is exempt from a permit. I know it says that in Chapter 1 too for the 2018 IBC too. Also, IBC or A117.1 does not require a handicap symbol on the parking space, just on the sign.

No different than when they take down the brille exit signs and change the two different sex restrooms into 2 both sex restrooms or when they lock the gas station restroom up after the C. O.

 

[Yankee Chronicler]

We do not use Chapter 1 in PA. Painting is exempt from a permit. I think it says that in Chapter 1 too. Also, IBC or A117.1 does not require a handicap symbol on the parking space, just on the sign.

Yes, but this is not "painting" as in painting a wall a different color. This is specifically discussing paint used to delineate required accessible parking spaces. The dimensions and markings of accessible parking spaces are spelled out in the ADAS (Section 502), and A117.1 (section 502). Section 1106 of the IBC requires accessible parking spaces, and refers to A117.1 for the dimensions.

Since the painted lines on the pavement are regulated by the code and reference standard, changing a compliant accessible space or failing to provide one where required by the code is a violation. The violation isn't "painting" without a permit, the violation is not providing a conforming element of a required accessible route.

In my state we get an additional layer: accessible parking is also specifically addressed in statute.

 

[Mr. Inspector]

Do you have the power to make them repaint when the paint gets warn out or when repaved or you can't see it on the gravel anymore? We can't.

 

[mtlogcabin]

[A] 110.1 General.
Construction or work for which a permit is required shall be subject to inspection by the building official and such construction or work shall remain visible and able to be accessed for inspection purposes until approved. Approval as a result of an inspection shall not be construed to be an approval of a violation of the provisions of this code or of other ordinances of the jurisdiction. Inspections presuming to give authority to violate or cancel the provisions of this code or of other ordinances of the jurisdiction shall not be valid. It shall be the duty of the owner or the owner’s authorized agent to cause the work to remain visible and able to be accessed for inspection purposes. Neither the building official nor the jurisdiction shall be liable for expense entailed in the removal or replacement of any material required to allow inspection.

 

[Yankee Chronicler]

Do you have the power to make them repaint when the paint gets warn out or when repaved or you can't see it on the gravel anymore? We can't.

If you don't have Chapter 1, your hands may be tied as far as maintenance. As for intentionally repainting a compliant space to make it non-complient, that's a violation of the sections I cited above. When the striping just gets worn away by age, we can (but rarely do) invoke Chapter 1:

[A] 101.2 Scope. The provisions of this code shall apply to the
construction, alteration, relocation, enlargement, replacement,
repair, equipment, use and occupancy, location, maintenance,
removal and demolition of every building or structure or any
appurtenances connected or attached to such buildings or
structures.

So if the owner's (or tenant's) lawful occupancy is contingent on an accessible route (which includes accessible parking), if they don't maintain the accessible parking stall lines and signage, it's a violation. In practice, we don't have the time or resources to drive around town looking for worn out handicapped parking striping, but we can use this if there's a complaint we have to act on.

xx