IBC 3409 Accessibility for Existing Buildings

[bldginsp]

Under the 2006 IBC 3409 section. Does anyone out there require the toilet room to comply with 3409.8.9 if just a change of occupancy and no other changes?

Thanks.

 

[mark handler]

IBC 3409.1 Scope. The provisions of Sections 3409.1 through 3409.8 apply to maintenance, change of occupancy, additions and alterations to existing buildings, including those identified as historic buildings.

IBC 3409.3 Change of occupancy. Existing buildings, or portions thereof, that undergo a change of group or occupancy 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. Change of group or occupancy that incorporates any alterations or additions shall comply with this section and Sections 3409.4, 3409.5, 3409.6 and 3409.7.

 

[Builder Bob]

20 % rule......

 

[Yikes]

So Mark, since 3409.3 makes no mention of accessible restroom facilities, your answer to bldginsp is "no", correct?

 

[mark handler]

No, just lazy

By the way, even though you don't enforce the ADA; the ADA, requires access to sanitary facilities

IBC 3409.6 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.

2. This provision does not apply to alterations limited solely to windows, hardware, operating controls, electrical outlets and signs.

3. This provision does not apply to alterations limited solely to mechanical systems, electrical systems, installation or alteration of fire protection systems and abatement of hazardous materials.

4. This provision does not apply to alterations undertaken for the primary purpose of increasing the accessibility of an existing building, facility or element.

 

[Mr. Inspector]

Don't forget they must spend at least 20% for the accessible route.

 

[Paul Sweet]

What do you mean by change of occupancy? Is it a change of use groups or just one tenant moving out and a new tenant with a similar business moving in?

I believe the ICC would only require accessibility improvements in the first case, but ADA would give somebody who couldn't get into the toilet the right to sue and have the Dept. of Justice on his side.

 

[TimNY]

Similarly, Ch 8 of the existing building code is the "Change of Occupancy" chapter, which reads the same as 3409.1.

As I interpret it, under the IBC the bathroom does not have to be made accessible.

 

[Simonsays]

So are you guys claiming that a "change of occupancy" with NO other work is an "alteration" and triggers the 20% rule?

 

[Examiner]

Change of Occupancy is a Use Group change. Say from Business to Mecantile. If the old Tenant was Business and the new Tenant is also Business you do not have a Change of Occupancy. If the new Tenant is doing new work then he or his landlord will have to comply with ADA upgrades. Maybe not the local ICC/ANSI A117.1 but the Feds for sure.

 

[Mr. Inspector]

So are you guys claiming that a "change of occupancy" with NO other work is an "alteration" and triggers the 20% rule?

Yes

 

[mark handler]

So are you guys claiming that a "change of occupancy" with NO other work is an "alteration" and triggers the 20% rule? Yes

20 percent of zero, is zero

 

[Builder Bob]

If any changs occur, then at least 20% of the project cost shall be used to make or modify changes to enhance accessilbility to the building.......... If it is $500.00 , then at least $100.00 should be spent to enhance accessibility.

 

[Gene Boecker]

The feds will require "barrier removal" if the use is a Public accommodation." This is required whether a permit is issued or not. Barrier removal does not mean that the restrooms must meet ALL the provisions of the new standards (unless of course it was built after 1991 and should have been in compliance ANYWAY!). It does mean that even with a change of occupancy, there is an ongoing obligation on the landlord to make the restrooms as accessible as possible. It may mean adding grab bars in a toilet stall that is too small or undercutting the lavatory counter and adding insulation even if the top of the lavatory is too high.

But that's the federal obligation. The IEBC does not require any work to the toilet rooms under a change of occupancy. During discussion on my code change proposal last cycle regarding accessible egress in existing buildings, the topic was debated for a long time (and I was beaten severely, haha). But the point is that the change of occupancy requires only limited alterations to the building to accommodate accessibility needs.

 

[bldginsp]

I have a change of use from single family to assembly (museum) but no accessible bathrooms on the first floor. No monetary improvements though.

 

[Gene Boecker]

Under the IEBC an accessible toilet room is not required on the first floor. You're done.

Under Title III of the ADA, the owner has an obligation to make alterations on the upper floor as part of barrier removal if the public has access to those spaces. Even if wheelchair access isn't available, the need to afford access for other persons with mobility disabilities would still warrant making changes as feasible.

 

[Examiner]

I think we all need to define what is meant by "Change of Occupancy". Do you mean change of Tenants or change of Tentant's intended use group? Under the Code; "change of occupancy" is a change of the building's use group. A change in tenants may not always change the use group.

 

[Gene Boecker]

Examiner, It is a "change of occupancy" as defined in the IEBC.

According to bldginsp:

"I have a change of use from single family to assembly (museum) but no accessible bathrooms on the first floor. No monetary improvements though."



That meets the definition from the IEBC.