• Welcome to The Building Code Forum

    Your premier resource for building code knowledge.

    This forum remains free to the public thanks to the generous support of our Sawhorse Members and Corporate Sponsors. Their contributions help keep this community thriving and accessible.

    Want enhanced access to expert discussions and exclusive features? Learn more about the benefits here.

    Ready to upgrade? Log in and upgrade now.

Accessible Parking Spaces for R-2 Apartment with Accessory Spaces

E

ETThompson

SAWHORSE
Joined
May 19, 2017
Messages
190
Location
Columbus, Ohio
Hi

We've been using 1106.2 to determine the number of required accessible parking spaces for the multifamily apartment project I'm working on. We have 65 apartments, are providing 43 parking spaces, R-2 classification and are required to provide Type A units.

At 2% we are required to provide 1 accessible parking space. If we were using Table 1106.1, we'd be required to provide 2. We are on a very tight urban site and would prefer to keep at one space.

We have two amenity spaces in the project. We'd considered these as accessory spaces to the overall floor and use. The first is a fitness center at level 01. It is currently about 1000 sf, our gross floor plate is 12,180sf, therefore less than 10%. However it is not below the 750 sf requirement for 303.1.2.

We also have a Amenity space on level 07 (highest level of building), including a lounge and roof deck at 930sf and 740sf respectively. These are therefore more than 10%.

These are primarily for use by residents, but the client would like to make them available for use by some of the tenants of their nearby properties.

Can we use Section 1006.2 for accessible parking spaces? Or do we have to use Table 1106.1? Or some proportional mix of the two?

Thanks
 
"1106.2 Groups I-1, R-1, R-2, R-3 and R-4. Accessible parking spaces shall be provided in Group I-1, R-1, R-2, R-3 and R-4 occupancies in accordance with Items 1 through 4 as applicable.

1. In Group R-2, R-3 and R-4 occupancies that are required to have Accessible, Type A or Type B dwelling units or sleeping units, at least 2 percent, but not less than one, of each type of parking space provided shall be accessible.

2. In Group I-1 and R-1 occupancies, accessible parking shall be provided in accordance with Table 1106.1.

3. Where at least one parking space is provided for each dwelling unit or sleeping unit, at least one accessible parking space shall be provided for each Accessible and Type A unit.

4. Where parking is provided within or beneath a building, accessible parking spaces shall also be provided within or beneath the building."

I understand that zoning dictates how many parking spaces we provide, but does 1106.2 (above, which we mostly meet - we are primarily R-2 and require accessible units) apply? Does it only apply when a building is purely and only R-2? That is pretty rare. Also, is there any citation which tells me this one way or another?
 
65 apartments and only 43 parking spaces provided. Hope you have off street parking available.
You are required to have 2 accessible units which means you need two HC spaces of which one has to be van accessible 1106.5
 
We're getting a variance for some portion of the deficiency and covering the rest with a nearby garage, as allowed by local zoning.

1106.2. Item 3 says we only have to provide one accessible space per accessible unit if we are providing 1:1 parking generally. So why would we have to provide one for each of the two accessible units? (our client may choose to, and it might be a good idea, but are they required to by code?)

As far as van spaces, the IBC commentary for 1106.5 says "The requirement for van accessible spaces is not intended to require a greater number of accessible spaces than required by 1106.1". Wouldn't this concept apply to 1106.2 also?
 
What does your state accessibility code say? In IL, our code would require at least 2 spaces in your situation.
 
Our state code (copied in my messages above) follows the IBC for this. See especially Section 1106.2 quoted above relative to R-2 buildings.
 
[A] 102.1 General. Where there is a conflict between a general
requirement and a specific requirement, the specific
requirement shall be applicable. Where, in any specific case,
different sections of this code specify different materials,
methods of construction or other requirements, the most
restrictive shall govern.
 
The Ohio Board of Building Standards says "Ohio’s Accessibility Provisions • If the design complies with the current OBC (Ohio Building Code) provisions for accessibility (which is what I cited above), and if the construction is completed in accordance with the design, the facility will be in compliance with Federal and Ohio Accessibility Laws." see https://www.com.ohio.gov/documents/dico_August292014BuildingontheCodeAccessibility.pdf
 
I have a similar question regarding 1106.2 for R-2 buildings with Type A units.

#1 says "at least 2%" of the parking spaces shall be accessible.
#3 says that if you provide parking for every unit in the building then you must provide "at least one accessible parking space" for each Type A unit.

Nothing in 1106.2 says that I need to add those two together. If I have a 100 unit apartment building with 2 Type A units and provide 2 accessible parking spaces it appears I am in compliance with both of these requirements.

However, the ICC commentary says you must add #3 to #1. I just don't see that in the code at all. The commentary may be the intent, but the code does not say they are additive; they both very specifically say "at least" with no further qualifications.



1106.3 Groups I-1, R-1, R-2, R-3 and R-4
Accessible parking spaces shall be provided in Group I-1, R-1, R-2, R-3 and R-4 occupancies in accordance with Items 1 through 4 as applicable.
  1. In Group R-2, R-3 and R-4 occupancies that are required to have Accessible, Type A or Type B dwelling units or sleeping units, at least 2 percent, but not less than one, of each type of parking space provided shall be accessible.
  2. In Group I-1 and R-1 occupancies, accessible parking shall be provided in accordance with Table 1106.2.
  3. Where at least one parking space is provided for each dwelling unit or sleeping unit, at least one accessible parking space shall be provided for each Accessible and Type A unit.
  4. Where parking is provided within or beneath a building, accessible parking spaces shall be provided within or beneath the building.
 
I had a mixed use R2 about a year ago. It was a 4 over 2 parking garage, with city required dedicated public parking spaces. I calculated the dedicated public spaces per t1106.1, and the R2 per 1106.2. If you have no "dedicated" public spaces, i.e. determined by zoning/planning, how do you know how many total spaces to allocate to the R2 or public space, and therefore how many would be subject to 1106.1 vs. 1106.2? In my case it was easy, it was a requirement on the developers, so they had the zoning standards to provide the min. per apartment, PLUS extra...price of urban development. I think clarification from your planning/zoning is needed. They should be the entity to determine if/how many "public" spaces are needed, if any.

Redeye: I had the exact same conversation on the same project mentioned above as you present. The code itself doesn't say items 1 through 4 are additive, it says use the provisions that are applicable. In my case 1,3,4 were applicable. I took the situation down the hall, then it went upstairs, and in the end it came down to a directive from above not to count them as additive. I read a lot of different opinions on it at the time and decided it was just unclear enough to move on. I had a lot of those documents at the time, but I can't seem to locate them now. It even seems like I had a technical opinion or interp but no luck finding anything.
 
I forgot to mention....the parking had been approved by the planning department with the SDP, based on their ordinance, which incorrectly assigned IBC t1106.1 as the method for calculating everything in the town. I came along and used the correct code for R2 portion, plus the public portion and it resulted in more spaces.
 
I would not think that getting a reduced parking variance and utilizing an adjacent parking garage for a shared parking agreement would also allow you to take an exception to the accessible parking requirements for the accessible units.
 
Under the Fair Housing Act Guidelines for non-federally or government funded housing, you would need 2% parking in each separate parking area (that mean each parking area with separate locations on the same site), at least one stall for each type of amenity (such as, tennis court, pool, USPS cluster boxes, Club house, pavilion, etc.. if accessible to the public it would need to meet ADA or ANSI A117.1 which ever more stringent) at least one stall for each visitor/guest separate parking area and one stall for each separate employee parking area. All must be connected to an accessible route. One more thing - if the development is federally or local government funded the whole development needs to follow the Uniform Federal Accessibilty standard with 5% fully accessible, the rest (if ground floor four or more) covered under the FHAG adaptable access. This I know from first hand DOJ/FHA experience.
 
Jean Tessmer-HI said:
Under the Fair Housing Act Guidelines for non-federally or government funded housing, you would need 2% parking in each separate parking area (that mean each parking area with separate locations on the same site), at least one stall for each type of amenity (such as, tennis court, pool, USPS cluster boxes, Club house, pavilion, etc.. if accessible to the public it would need to meet ADA or ANSI A117.1 which ever more stringent) at least one stall for each visitor/guest separate parking area and one stall for each separate employee parking area. All must be connected to an accessible route. One more thing - if the development is federally or local government funded the whole development needs to follow the Uniform Federal Accessibilty standard with 5% fully accessible, the rest (if ground floor four or more) covered under the FHAG adaptable access. This I know from first hand DOJ/FHA experience.
Click to expand...
Thanks. The FHA and ADA are pretty clear. The IBC seems pretty clear and I agree with Sifu; the only hiccup is the IBC Commentary which says they are additive. We are proceeding on this particular project assuming they are not additive. In this particular case we could restripe the tenant parking to achieve the required number by an additive interpretation but we would then be less than 1:1 units to parking spaces and the additional spaces would not be required... :rolleyes:
 
some new info - HUD does not require the 2% accessible parking to be marked. If you have commonly used areas such as: laundry building, club houses, pools, pavilions, tennis courts, etc... you need to apply the ANSI A117.1 1986, to those parking spaces, only if used by the residents of the facility. If those common areas are open to the public the parking will need to comply with the ADA. The difference between when you apply FHA and ADA is commerce. If it affects commerce like sales offices, or open to the general public it has to be ADA compliant.
 
redeyedfly said:
Thanks. The FHA and ADA are pretty clear. The IBC seems pretty clear and I agree with Sifu; the only hiccup is the IBC Commentary which says they are additive. We are proceeding on this particular project assuming they are not additive. In this particular case we could restripe the tenant parking to achieve the required number by an additive interpretation but we would then be less than 1:1 units to parking spaces and the additional spaces would not be required... :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Persistence pays.....The 2021 commentary now directs that the 2% (item1) and one per unit (item 3) are not additive. The higher number prevails.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top