• 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.

ADA Category? = New Construction versus Alteration

BayPointArchitect

BayPointArchitect

Sawhorse
Joined
Oct 19, 2009
Messages
529
Location
Lincoln
I have very general question I can’t seem to find an direct answer to in ADAAG.

If an existing building is renovated to a different occupancy—is this classified as new construction or an alteration?

In this case it is converting an apartment building into an office building—if that makes any difference.
 
Not "new" construction but they will need to comply with the new construction Accessibility Requirements
 
IEBC
No change shall be made in the use or occupancy of any building that would place the building in a different division of the same group of occupancies or in a different group of occupancies, unless such building is made to comply with the requirements of this code for such division or group of occupancies. Subject to the approval of the building official, the use or occupancy of existing buildings shall be permitted to be changed and the building is allowed to be occupied for purposes in other groups without conforming to all the requirements of this code for those groups, provided the new or proposed use is less hazardous, based on life and fire risk, than the existing use.
 
I agree that this would be an "alteration". Regardless, all of those specific areas being changed will need to comply with current ADA regulations unless there is an exemption such as technical / structural infeasibility or conflict with historic preservation.
 
Strictly from a Code perspective, it is a 'change of occupancy' and regulated via the IEBC. The IEBC considers a change of occupancy the most significant change to a building. The accessibility requirements may not be as stringent as 'new' construction, but they are pretty close.
Code officials cannot enforce the ADA, but design professionals must design for both the Code AND the ADA.
I suppose that's why DP's get the big bucks... by comparison any way.
 
ADA doesn't appear to require a change in occupancy by itself to trigger any changes. However, any alterations to accommodate the new occupancy must comply with ADASAD, and you must spend up to 20% of the cost of the alteration to make the path of travel, restrooms, telephones, & drinking fountains serving the altered area comply with ADASAD.
https://www.ada.gov/2010ADAstandards_index.htm
36.402 Alterations (pg. 21)
 
ADA is always retroactive regardless of construction (I know I am putting that broadly), Change of Use or Occupancy kicks in the most retroactive improvements under the building code during construction (even with little to no construction).
 
Housing to office does indeed create access differences, FHA/HUD vs ADASAD, did prior use have a publicly accessible, lobby, rental office, restrooms that will remain?
Is the ground floor elevated above grade or accessible from the sidewalk?
 
Paul Sweet said:
ADA doesn't appear to require a change in occupancy by itself to trigger any changes. However, any alterations to accommodate the new occupancy must comply with ADASAD, and you must spend up to 20% of the cost of the alteration to make the path of travel, restrooms, telephones, & drinking fountains serving the altered area comply with ADASAD.
https://www.ada.gov/2010ADAstandards_index.htm
36.402 Alterations (pg. 21)
Click to expand...

interesting, 2009 IBC only let's you count 20% of the accessible route. You can't use the costs for restrooms, telephones, & drinking fountains towards the 20%. (3411.7 exception 1)
 
Thank you everyone. My thinking is to give first priority to getting wheelchair folks inside the building after they unload within the van accessible parking area. Then make a few upgrades to a restroom. If they show me that they have a five gallon bucket of money, I will then insist that they spend at least a gallon on other improvements.
 
Rick18071 said:
interesting, 2009 IBC only let's you count 20% of the accessible route. You can't use the costs for restrooms, telephones, & drinking fountains towards the 20%. (3411.7 exception 1)
Click to expand...
International Building Code 2009
3411.4.2 Complete Change of Occupancy
Where an entire building undergoes a change of occupancy, it shall comply with Section 3411.4.1 and shall have all of the following accessible features:
  1. At least one accessible building entrance.
  2. At least one accessible route from an accessible building entrance to primary function areas.
  3. Signage complying with Section 1110.
  4. Accessible parking, where parking is being provided.
  5. At least one accessible passenger loading zone, when loading zones are provided.
  6. At least one accessible route connecting accessible parking and accessible passenger loading zones to an accessible entrance.
Where it is technically infeasible to comply with the new construction standards for any of these requirements for a change of group or occupancy, the above items shall conform to the requirements to the maximum extent technically feasible.

Any new construction/addition/renovation shall be accessible.
 
Last edited:
3411.7 Alterations affecting an area containing a primary
function. Where an alteration affects the accessibility to, or
contains an area of primary function, the route to the primary
function area shall be accessible. The accessible route to the
primary function area shall include toilet facilities or drinking
fountains serving the area of primary function.
Exceptions:
1. The costs of providing the accessible route are not
required to exceed 20 percent of the costs of the
alterations affecting the area of primary function.

The 20% is based on the improvements to the primary function area as far as what you have to spend. It can be spent anywhere on the accessible route including toilets and DF in my opinion as the exception would refer back to the code section that specifically includes those items for this piece of code...What good is getting them in the door if then they "go" on the floor...?


Rick18071 said:
interesting, 2009 IBC only let's you count 20% of the accessible route. You can't use the costs for restrooms, telephones, & drinking fountains towards the 20%. (3411.7 exception 1)
Click to expand...
 
Accessible routes are only in chapter 4 of ANSI A117.1 with references to chapters 3 and 4. IBC chapter 11 says where they are required. Anything else like toilet and a DF are not an accessible route.
 
Read all the way to the end of the code section

The accessible route to the
primary function area shall include toilet facilities or drinking
fountains serving the area of primary function.

For the purposes of this section, they are...
 
I would think that would mean the accessible route to toilet facilities and drinking fountains. Not the fixtures themselves.
If you are replacing the toilet with an ADA toilet and the door is too small to get a wheel chair in I don't think you could count it as part of the 20%.
 
Of course you can, we don't get to tell them where to spend the money. It makes sense to get them in the building and then the bathrooms and whatever else, but if they "owe" $1000 in upgrades and a ramp to get them in costs $10,000, are you going to make them put in a tenth of a ramp or do nothing or put a grand into their bathroom even if a wheelchair user can't get in?

Remember, not all accessibility is about wheelchairs.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top