Accessible route to a roof deck

[RIS]

I have an existing 3 story multifamily building which we are renovating. We would like to add a roof deck, we are required to have one Type B unit on the first floor. The building has a single stair in a rated shaft that leads to the roof. A Code reviewer is claiming that we need an accessible route to the shared common roof deck per code section 1007.4, however this section has an exemption # 7 that states: "7. An accessible route between stories is not required where Type B units are exempted by Section 1107.7" 1107.7.1 only requires first floors of non elevator buildings to be accessible.

Does anyone have any experience with this?

 

[classicT]

1007.4 does not line up with either the IBC nor IEBC. Are you sure on the code references? I'd imagine the reference would be in Ch. 11 if it's regarding accessibility. Or is this a typo and it was 1107.4?

 

[classicT]

Regarding 1107.4, take note that the accessible route requirements therein only apply to dwelling and sleeping units. What you have proposed is not Group R in use. It is likely going to be Group A of some variant.

Given that the area served is not a residential unit, the correct section to reference would actually be 1104.4. In that case, an accessible route is required to the roof unless you can meet one of the exceptions listed. Unfortunately, I do not believe that one of these exceptions would fit.

PA-BC 1104.4 Multistory Buildings and Facilities​

At least one accessible route shall connect each accessible story, mezzanine and occupied roofs in multilevel buildings and facilities.
Exceptions:

1. An accessible route is not required to stories, mezzanines and occupied roofs that have an aggregate area of not more than 3,000 square feet (278.7 m2) and are located above and below accessible levels. This exception shall not apply to:
   
   1. Multiple tenant facilities of Group M occupancies containing five or more tenant spaces used for the sales or rental of goods and where at least one such tenant space is located on a floor level above or below the accessible levels.
   2. Stories or mezzanines containing offices of health care providers (Group B or I).
   3. Passenger transportation facilities and airports (Group A-3 or B).
   4. Government buildings.
2. Stories, mezzanines or occupied roofs that do not contain accessible elements or other spaces as determined by Section 1107 or 1108 are not required to be served by an accessible route from an accessible level.
3. In air traffic control towers, an accessible route is not required to serve the cab and the floor immediately below the cab.
4. Where a two-story building or facility has one story or mezzanine with an occupant load of five or fewer persons that does not contain public use space, that story or mezzanine shall not be required to be connected by an accessible route to the story above or below.

As you are creating new space, I would say that the IEBC would treat the space as an addition. Generally, there is little relief in this route. See 305.5.

PA-EBC 305.5 Additions​

Provisions for new construction shall apply to additions. An addition that affects the accessibility to, or contains an area of, a primary function shall comply with the requirements in Section 305.7.

 

[RIS]

1007.4 does not line up with either the IBC nor IEBC. Are you sure on the code references? I'd imagine the reference would be in Ch. 11 if it's regarding accessibility. Or is this a typo and it was 1107.4?

Yes that was a typo, thanks. 1107.4 was the section sited.

 

[MADrkTEK]

Review IEBC 305:
while you could look in chapter 11 of the IBC, the scoping requirements for new buildings is different than those for existing buildings. Nonetheless, if you want to look at the IBC, i’d start by determining if new construction requires the roof deck to be on an accessible route: as indicated above IBC 1104 offers a threshold on when a story or roof needs to be considered to be connected with the accessible route. Does the roof‘s occupiable area exceeding 3,000 sf? If not,then exception 1 applies, end of discussion: the roof does not need to be part of the building’s accessible route.

if the roof does not qualify for that exception, then look at the scoping exceptions listed in the IEBC; 305: these are the scoping requirements for existing buildings. It covers change of use, additions and alterations,…. Whichever one applies, go through the scope and see if the roof deck is required to be on the accessible route.
IEBC 305.7: is important to note:
therein you can consider the 20% max budget allocation limit, in that you are only required to commit 20% of your budget towards achieving full current compliance with the accessibility scoping requirements of the code.
305.8 then lists what the IEBC alterations accessibility scoping requirements are. Again, these requirements max out at 20% of your adjusted construction budget if you do not want to achieve full accessibility with the current improvements.

 

[Yikes]

1. Where is the building located (what is the adopted code of the jurisdiction)?
2. What year was the existing building constructed for first occupancy?
3. Are any of the dwelling units considered as "public housing"? (Utilizing public funds for development or operation on behalf of a public entity).

 

[classicT]

Does the roof‘s occupiable area exceeding 3,000 sf? If not,then exception 1 applies, end of discussion: the roof does not need to be part of the building’s accessible route.

Be careful... take note that the exemption specifies aggregate area.

An accessible route is not required to stories, mezzanines and occupied roofs that have an aggregate area of not more than 3,000 square feet (278.7 m2) and are located above and below accessible levels.

 

[RIS]

1. Where is the building located (what is the adopted code of the jurisdiction)?
2. What year was the existing building constructed for first occupancy?
3. Are any of the dwelling units considered as "public housing"? (Utilizing public funds for development or operation on behalf of a public entity).

1. 2018 IBC
2. original structure was built sometime prior to 1900
3. no

 

[Yikes]

I had a privately-funded multifamily project in California with similar conditions, first occupied in the 1940s. The owner wanted to add a roof deck.

In California, our CBC 11A accessibility code for private housing has its scoping based on the federal Fair Housing Act (FHA).

• Any multifamily building that was first occupied prior to March 13, 1991 is not required to have accessible units, aka "covered multifamily dwellings" (CMDs).
• 11A/FHA requires accessibility for common areas and amenities (such as a roof deck) that serve CMDs. sine there were no CMDs in the project, none of the amenities need to be accessible.
• Also worth noting that the roof deck is for resident use only. It is not rented out to outside parties, so it is not subject to ADA.

I know your project is not in California, but if the scoping provisions of your adopted code for private multifamily housing are based on the Fair Housing Act, the same logic would apply to your roof deck.