IEBC Sect 305.7 and Exception 1

[Scott Dillow]

Regarding the "20% rule" and compounded renovation costs. I seem to remember running into a code authority one time a while back that had a stipulation about multiple renovations over a short span and compounding of renovation costs. The idea being that a building owner couldn't get around (major) accessibility upgrades by having multiple projects where the 20% of the construction costs would never get you to the point of having to do a major accessibility upgrade like accessible public toilet rooms, parking, or an elevator.

I do not think there is actual code language addressing this, but maybe someone knows better than I. We are in Pennsylvania, but don't think the UCC has any language pertaining to this. Can anyone help me out?

 

[steveray]

Well...ADA is going to require those upgrades typically regardless of permit....I believe the only "lookback" stuff might have been for substantial damage or improvement for floodproofing stuff, but that has been so twisted over the years maybe some places do have it in their code...

 

[Paul Sweet]

It's in the federal ADA law:
ADA Standards for Accessible Design
§ 36.403 Alterations: Path of travel.
(f) Disproportionality.
(1) Alterations made to provide an accessible path of travel to the altered area will be deemed disproportionate to the overall alteration when the cost exceeds 20% of the cost of the alteration to the primary function area.
...
(h) Series of smaller alterations.
(1) The obligation to provide an accessible path of travel may not be evaded by performing a series of small alterations to the area served by a single path of travel if those alterations could have been performed as a single undertaking.
(2)
(i) If an area containing a primary function has been altered without providing an accessible path of travel to that area, and subsequent alterations of that area, or a different area on the same path of travel, are undertaken within three years of the original alteration, the total cost of alterations to the primary function areas
on that path of travel during the preceding three year period shall be considered in determining whether the cost of making that path of travel accessible is
disproportionate.
(ii) Only alterations undertaken after January 26, 1992, shall be considered in determining if the cost of providing an accessible path of travel is disproportionate to the overall cost of the alterations.

 

[Mr. Inspector]

Regarding the "20% rule" and compounded renovation costs. I seem to remember running into a code authority one time a while back that had a stipulation about multiple renovations over a short span and compounding of renovation costs. The idea being that a building owner couldn't get around (major) accessibility upgrades by having multiple projects where the 20% of the construction costs would never get you to the point of having to do a major accessibility upgrade like accessible public toilet rooms, parking, or an elevator.

I do not think there is actual code language addressing this, but maybe someone knows better than I. We are in Pennsylvania, but don't think the UCC has any language pertaining to this. Can anyone help me out?

Never herd of doing this.

Scott is not talking about ADA. The UCC is the state code which uses the IBC except for chapters 1 and 30 and IEBC.

 

[Scott Dillow]

Thanks! I knew I had ran into this before somewhere.

It's in the federal ADA law:
ADA Standards for Accessible Design
§ 36.403 Alterations: Path of travel.
(f) Disproportionality.
(1) Alterations made to provide an accessible path of travel to the altered area will be deemed disproportionate to the overall alteration when the cost exceeds 20% of the cost of the alteration to the primary function area.
...
(h) Series of smaller alterations.
(1) The obligation to provide an accessible path of travel may not be evaded by performing a series of small alterations to the area served by a single path of travel if those alterations could have been performed as a single undertaking.
(2)
(i) If an area containing a primary function has been altered without providing an accessible path of travel to that area, and subsequent alterations of that area, or a different area on the same path of travel, are undertaken within three years of the original alteration, the total cost of alterations to the primary function areas
on that path of travel during the preceding three year period shall be considered in determining whether the cost of making that path of travel accessible is
disproportionate.
(ii) Only alterations undertaken after January 26, 1992, shall be considered in determining if the cost of providing an accessible path of travel is disproportionate to the overall cost of the alterations.