IBC Chapter 11 and private aircraft hangars

[righter101]

Given:

Existing 4 bay private aircraft hangar.

2 hangars owned by one individual, the remaining two are owned by other owners, for a total of 3 owners.

Total building size is 12,000 square feet.

The hangars are for private use.

Owners of one hangar want to put in a bathroom (toilet and sink).

Would this need to meet the accessibility requirements per CH 11 of the IBC??

It appears to be necessary by CH 11 as it is not a listed exception.....

However it seems like it shouldn't be required....

Thoughts??

 

[mtlogcabin]

Because an airplane hanger of this size is an "S" occupancy all hangers are required to have a restroom or a common restroom serving the hangers.

As for accessibility the hanger is not open to the public and a restroom installed within the private hanger is not a "common" use restroom you may be able to use 1109.2 exception 1

If you construct a "private office" around the restroom then it would meet the literal wording of the code. Or you could just forget the office and classify it as a private restroom within a private hanger

In reality you are only talking about a slightly larger room within a 3,000 sq ft hanger, 2 grab bars and a HC toilet that may cost $25.00 more than a lower toilet at the orange or blue box store. I would encourage you to encourage the owner to install an accessible restroom as you never know what the future will be.

 

[brudgers]

What exception would allow it to avoid accessibility requirements?

 

[globe trekker]

Existing 4 bay private aircraft hangar. 2 hangars owned by one individual, the remainingtwo are owned by other owners, for a total of 3 owners. Total building size is 12,000 square feet.

The hangars are for private use.

Did you mean to say that there are 4 bays in one 12,000 sq. ft. hangar?

What happens when the private owners have guests from the planes, who want to use

a regular sized restroom instead of the (possibly) smaller sized version on the plane?

Anyone other than the owners could not use the non-ADA restroom. IMO, I'm thinking

that an fully compliant Accessible restroom is required.

.

 

[righter101]

What exception would allow it to avoid accessibility requirements?

Well, there are several. If, for example, a SFR was located on the same property (which is common at this private airstrip), then the application of :

1103.2.4 Detached dwellings. Detached one- and two-family

dwellings and accessory structures, and their associated

sites and facilities, are not required to be accessible.

With the consideration of aircraft hangar under "sites and facilities".....

 

[righter101]

Did you mean to say that there are 4 bays in one 12,000 sq. ft. hangar?What happens when the private owners have guests from the planes, who want to use

a regular sized restroom instead of the (possibly) smaller sized version on the plane?

Anyone other than the owners could not use the non-ADA restroom. IMO, I'm thinking

that an fully compliant Accessible restroom is required.

.

Yes, there are 4 individual 3000 sq. ft. bays for a total of about 12K sq ft. 2 are owned by a single owner, the other 2 owned by separate owners.

I was not around for the original construction but know that there are no existing restrooms.

These planes are tiny cessnas and piper cubs, they have no restrooms.

 

[mark handler]

Accessible restroom is required.

 

[brudgers]

Well, there are several. If, for example, a SFR was located on the same property (which is common at this private airstrip), then the application of : 1103.2.4 Detached dwellings. Detached one- and two-family dwellings and accessory structures, and their associated sites and facilities, are not required to be accessible. With the consideration of aircraft hangar under "sites and facilities".....

If the hanger was associated with dwellings, then given that it has three separate units under the control of three different individuals, it would be a community facility. But of course, that's not the case, is it?

 

[righter101]

Accessible restroom is required.

Thank you for a concise opinion in this matter. Mr. Handler, your knowledge in this field is greatly appreciated as well as your willingness to share it in a polite, respectful, factual manner.