Florida Accessibility 2017 - 20% required or not.

[Steve Vetter]

Does 202.3 Exception 1 seems to imply that 20% is not required if circulation path to area of alteration is existing/unaltered (accessible route not required) or does 202.4 apply restroom upgrades etc.?

202 Existing Buildings and Facilities

202.3 Alterations

Where existing elements or spaces or common areas are altered, each altered element, space or area shall comply with the applicable requirements of Chapter 2 and section 201.1.1. See Section 208.1 for existing parking.

EXCEPTIONS:

1. Unless required by 202.4, where elements or spaces are altered and the circulation path to the altered element or space is not altered, an accessible route shall not be required.

202.4 Alterations Affecting Primary Function Areas

In addition to the requirements of 202.3, an alteration that affects or could affect the usability of or access to an area containing a primary function shall be made so as to ensure that, to the maximum extent feasible, the path of travel to the altered area, including the rest rooms, telephones, and drinking fountains serving the altered area, are readily accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities, unless such alterations are disproportionate to the overall alterations in terms of cost pursuant to 202.4.1. Alterations to windows, hardware, controls, electrical outlets, and signage shall not be deemed to be alterations that affect the usability of or access to an area containing a primary function.

 

[jar546]

I had zero time to look at this today but I would like to dive in on this by Monday. I hope we get some other takers before then.

 

[ADAguy]

The exception seems to be a contradiction,
how can you alter a primary function area without providing a circulation path to it if the existing path is not compliant?

 

[Paul Sweet]

It might meet the Florida code, but the building owner could still get sued under ADA.