California apartment adaptability

[Yikes]

Looking for your opinions for "covered multifamily dwelling units", as I'm trying to discern acessibility vs adapability, especially as it relates to bathroom vanities.

CBC 1128A.1 says covered multifamily dwelling units shall be "adaptable and accessible into and throughout the dwelling unit as provided in this division". (For this exercise, assume that 100% of the units are "covered".)

* Question #1: Does "adaptable and accessible" mean that at C of O, some limited number of units will be already 100% accessible and the rest of the units will be adaptable for future 100% acessibility?

If your answer is "yes", then I have a follow-up question:

CBC 1134A.1 says all bathrooms in the covered units must "comply" with section 1134A.8

CBC 1134A.8 says "bathrooms or powder rooms required to be accessible [notice they didn't say "adaptable"] shall have at least one accessible lavatory.

* Question #2: in an "adaptable" unit, does this mean - because it is not called "accessible" unit - it does not need an accessible lavatory?

My practical issue is that I have about 95% of apartments where the contractor did not install finish floor under the vanity, or make the vanity front/base removeable. They believe that because only about 5% of the apartmets are called "accessible", this requirment does nto apply to the remaining units, whcih they call "adaptable".

 

[Gene Boecker]

Re: California apartment adaptability

Yikes, Yikes!

This is a complicated issue. The main problem is that the regs use the term accessible in many places where they mean adaptable. It really doesn't matter what they call it because what you end up with is the same. The route may be "accessible" but the unit is "adaptable."

100% of the units need to meet the requirements. There is no 5% fraction. That applies to transient housing (like hotels). If these are condos or apartments, they fit into the "A" section of the CA accessibility rules (and the FHA rules as well).

The floor finish under the lavatory needs to extend under the cabinet and have the back wall painted as well. FYI: Under the FHA rules this is only needed if you use the forward approach to the lavatory. The CA rules apply this provision regardless of the approach.

One caveat: According to 1134A.2 there are two options for bathroom compliance. One requires all the bathrooms in the dwelling unit to comply and the other only requires one of the bathrooms to comply. If the second option is selected, then the remaining bathrooms do not need anything done in them regarding the lavatory although there are still some other adaptable features required. So, there is a "percentage" that have fewer features within them if the option 2 route is chosen; but, all units are "adaptable" since none are fully "accessible."

Sufficiently muddy? :?:

 

[Yikes]

Re: California apartment adaptability

A related question - assuming one bathroom/unit - at time of C of O, if you are an inspector, do you look to see that 100% of the units already have their their vanity base, toe kick, etc. removed, sitting off to one side? Grab bars installed?

Here's how I've handled it in the past: I have made all of the units "adaptable", with about 5% of the units currently accessible.

The difference between adaptable vs accessible is that an accessible unit already has (1) the toilet and tub grab bars installed, (2) the cabinet faces removed at the bathroom and kitchen sink + 30" kitchen worksurface, (3) the lower closet shelf and rod installed, (4) the lower peephole at the unit entry door. Other than that, my accessible units and adaptable units are usually identical in every other aspect.

The thing I disliked about this "accessible" approach in 5% of units is that very few people are actually in a wheelchair. Upon move-in, the residents ask for the cabinet faces to be reinstalled, and the grab bars to be removed ("looks too institutional"). It was a waste of effort. I would rather start with 100% adaptable (no grab bars yet, cabinets still in place).

 

[jshoe]

Re: California apartment adaptability

Gene already said this, but here is an excerpt from California's webpage (keep up the good work, by the way):

A-22. What is an "adaptable dwelling unit" versus an "accessible dwelling unit"?

In the California Building Code the terms adaptable and accessible do not designate different levels of compliance. The terms "adaptable" and "accessible" generally reflect Congress' use of the terms in the text of The Fair Housing Act, and in the House and Senate conference reports. "Adaptable dwelling units", when used with respect to covered multifamily dwellings in California, means dwelling units that are accessible and include features of adaptable design, on an accessible route unless the accessible route is exempted by unusual site characteristics. The features of "adaptable design" include backing for grab bar installation and the base cabinet removal at the kitchen sink and work area.

Although there is no definition for an accessible dwelling unit it is generally considered an adaptable unit on an accessible route. The standards specify that an accessible route be provided into and throughout the entire covered dwelling unit. Some of the specific elements of an accessible route include sufficient width of ramps, halls, doors (e.g., 32" clear), headroom, & lift/elevators. An accessible route is the critical element that allows the successful use of any unit.

 

[jshoe]

Re: California apartment adaptability

but in a similar question...

i have a project that is made up of something like 58 condominium units. they are all clustered in buildings ranging from duplexes to quadriplexes. they are also all multi-story dwelling units with the primary entrances located on grade, and with no elevators. there are only two quadriplexes, meaning that there are eight covered multi-family dwellings. as far as i can figure, 10% but not less than one of multi-story, covered multi-family dwellings are required to meet the requirements of Section 1102A.3.1 (a powder or bathroom that complies with Division IV on the level of the primary entrance, an accessible path to and throughout the unit, blah, blah), and that's it. none of the other units in the project have to meet squat.

right? wrong? reasons and codifications?

Thanks for your help!

 

[Yikes]

Re: California apartment adaptability

jshoe - I don't see your location posted, but I assume the subject is still adaptability in California.

CBC 1102A.1 says that each building on a building site shall be considered separately... EXCEPT when calculating the number of units which must comply with Section 1102A.3.1 [i.e. multistory apartmet or condos in buildings with no elevator].

In your example, I believe the 10% rule would apply as follows:

0.10 x 58 = 5.8 ~ 6 units minimum must have the following features:

1. Accessible primary entry

2. Accessible powder room on ground floor level

3. All rooms on ground level of unit are accessible.

4. Common use areas in the condo site are accessible (clubhouses, pools, etc.)

1102A.3 concludes: "The minimum number of multifamily dwelling units which must comply with this section shall be calculated using the total number of all multistory dwelling units in buildings on a site which are subject to this section. any fraction thereof shall eb rounded to the next highest whole number."

 

[jshoe]

Re: California apartment adaptability

Oops...

Yeah, I'm in the land of shake and bake (So Cal).

Thanks for the response. I'm thinking, though, that the Code is saying that 10% of dwelling units that are BOTH mulit-story dwelling units AND covered multi-family dwellings. Am i way off base?

input is always appreciated.

Cheers...