Discrepancy between IBC and ADA - what to do?

[lacoope]

WHAT DO YOU DO WHEN THERE IS A DISCREPANCY BETWEEN ADA AND IBC?????

I found a discrepancy between IBC Section 1104.4 and ADA Section 206.2.3 for Accessibility in Multi-Story Buildings.

Exception 1 in ADA only applies to Private Buildings. The IBC does not distinguish between public and private buildings. I am trying to decide whether to classify a mezzanine as an S1 or B occupancy. (The actual use of the mezzanine will be a combination of storage, informal office, meeting room). This has bearing on the rating of a fire barrier (S1 requires 3hr barrier / B requires 2hr). My project qualifies for all the aspects of Exception 1 except that it is an activity center for a private non-profit organization and is being classified as a public/quasi-public occupancy in the land use code - hence the dilemma

So if I go by IBC, the B-occupancy Mezzanine DOES NOT need to be accessible. But if I go by ADA, it DOES need to be accessible. Any thoughts????

(Also, I assume B-occupancy does not qualify for exception 2/4 because it could be considered a public use space even if it has 5 occupants??? Is that true???)

Here are the relevant sections for Accessible Routes:

2012 IBC: Section 1104.4 Multilevel buildings and facilities:

At least one accessible route shall connect each accessible level, including mezzanines, in multilevel buildings and facilities.

EXCEPTIONS:

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

4. Where a two-story building or facility has one story with an occupant load of five or fewer persons that does not contain public use space, that story shall not be required to be connected by an accessible route to the story above or below.

ADA Guidelines: Section 206.2.3 Multi-Story Buildings and Facilities:

At least one accessible route shall connect each story and mezzanine in multi-story buildings and facilities.

EXCEPTIONS:

1. In private buildings or facilities that are less than three stories or that have less than 3000 square feet (279 m2) per story, an accessible route shall not be required to connect stories provided that the building or facility is not a shopping center, a shopping mall, the professional office of a health care provider, a terminal, depot or other station used for specified public transportation, an airport passenger terminal, or another type of facility as determined by the Attorney General.

2. Where a two story public building or facility has one story with an occupant load of five or fewer persons that does not contain public use space, that story shall not be required to be connected to the story above or below.3. In detention and correctional facilities,

 

[mark handler]

It is a risk management issue, the safest way is to go with the Most restrictive. the risk is a lawsuit.

 

[Francis Vineyard]

Seattle Dept. of Planning and Development doesn’t enforce ADA or the ADA Standards, building owners and designers are responsible for compliance. - See more at: ADA rules

Assuming of course this is in Seattle WA

 

[Frank]

ADA has different requirements for state and local governments (Title II) vs public accomodations and commercial facilities that are under Title III. Land use or zoning classifications do not apply to the building code or ADA.

Looking at the expanded exception in IBC

1104.4 Multilevel buildings and facilities.

At least one accessible route shall connect each accessible level, including mezzanines, in multilevel buildings and facilities.

Exceptions:

1. An accessible route is not required to stories and mezzanines 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:

1.1. Multiple tenant facilities of Group M occupancies containing five or more tenant spaces;

1.2. Levels containing offices of health care providers (Group B or I); or

1.3. Passenger transportation facilities and airports (Group A-3 or B).

They don't look that much different just state/local government vs private buildings.

Exception 4 applies in both cases

 

[khsmith55]

I think your problem (confusion) is between Title II (Public entities) and Title III of the ADA. Title III has the same 3000sf exemption as the IBC, but Title II specifically states this exemption does not apply to Public Entities (i.e. Title II buildings). IMHO, your project falls under Title III of the ADA which is consistent with the IBC.

 

[mark handler]

I agree with KHSmith, Public use (T3) is Not public owned (T2)

Still a risk management issue

Do you feel lucky? Well do you?

 

[ADAguy]

Note: we are speaking "legal" vs code and as we all know, ADA is a law not a building code. The ongoing disconnect is the inability to use your BC as a safe harbor if it has not been certified by DOJ.

Land use definition identifies it as a public (non-profit) use, as such, like a Charter school, it must comply with access requirements.

In CA GC4450 requires compliance with the more restrictive requirements but not less than the ADA. What does WA government law say, vs building code?