Is ADA applicable to my 4-unit building? - Oakland, CA

[Aaron Stein]

Hi all,

Can you please help in determining whether ADA applies to my 4-unit building in Oakland, CA? I am of the opinion it does not as the building was built in 1924, contains 4 apartments and no elevator and therefor no "covered multi family dwellings" but would like a second opinion as the City is calling for me to define an accessible path of travel.

I am currently doing a renovation on a 4-Unit building which I owner occupy in Oakland, CA and have run into an issue with the City where they are requiring an "accessible path of travel" to an existing common area in the basement of the building where a new room laundry area is supposed to be built for the tenants and myself.

The building department has referenced this section of the code for why the common area needs an accessible path of travel:

1102A.2. Additions shall be subject to the requirements of this chapter, provided the addition, when considered alone, meets the definition of a covered multifamily dwelling, as defined in Chapter 2. New common use spaces serving existing covered multifamily dwellings shall be subject to the requirements of this chapter

I disagree with this for two reasons:

1. Since the basement area was being used as common area for tenant storage before, building the laundry room is an alteration of the space and no new common use space is being added.

2. Whether it is new common space or not, the accessibility requirement should not apply as none of the units in the building fall under the definition of a "covered multi family dwelling" in chapter 2 referenced in 1102A.2 above.

The building was built in 1924, contains 4 apartments and has no elevator. There are also no "ground floor" units as no accessible path of travel currently exists to any of the units in the building.

Is there something I am missing as to why the City would ask for an accessible path of travel or was it an improper application of the code to this project?

Thanks for your helo

 

[cda]

Welcome

Give it a couple of days

There are some calif and a few persons in your area, that should give s good answer

 

[cda]

Do you have a link to the chapter 2 definition, since calif is under the moon beam code

 

[mark handler]

Base on your description I cannot tell is you are a "Covered multifamily dwelling" or not.
Be carful with the Or's in the code.

2016 CBC
Chapter 2 Definitions
COVERED MULTIFAMILY DWELLINGS. [HCD 1-AC] “Covered multifamily dwellings” means either of the following:

• Buildings that consist of at least four condominium dwelling units or at least three apartment dwelling units if the buildings have at least one elevator.
• The ground floor dwelling units in buildings that consist of at least four condominium dwelling units or at least three apartment dwelling units if the building does not have an elevator.

Covered multifamily dwellings include dwellings listed in Section 1102A.1. For purposes of this definition, dwelling units within a single structure separated by firewalls do not constitute separate buildings.

 

[Aaron Stein]

Under the chapter 2 definition provided the building does not seem to meet the criteria of a “covered multi family dwelling” and should also be exempt as it was built before March 13,1991.

Chapter 2 CBC: Definitions

COVERED MULTIFAMILY DWELLINGS. [HCD 1-AC] “Covered multifamily dwellings” means either of the following:


1. Buildings that consist of at least four condominium dwelling units or at least three apartment dwelling units if the buildings have at least one elevator.

(Not applicable as the building contains 4 apartments not condominiums and no elevator)


2. The ground floor dwelling units in buildings that consist of at least four condominium dwelling units or at least three apartment dwelling units if the building does not have an elevator.

(Not applicable as the building has no apartments on the “ground floor” where “Ground floor" means a floor of a building with a building entrance on an accessible route.)

Covered multifamily dwellings include dwellings listed in Section 1102A.1. (The building is not listed here as does not fall under the definition of a "covered multi family dwelling" as defined in chapter 2) For purposes of this definition, dwelling units within a single structure separated by firewalls do not constitute separate buildings.

 

[cda]

So what is on the ground floor of a building??

Plus any work has to meet present code.

Do you have someone working with you on this that can talk code??

 

[mark handler]

Aaron
Make your case to the city.
If the plan checker does not agree, bring it to the Building Official.
There is also an appeals board
You can also contact a CASp to write an opinion report.

 

[Aaron Stein]

So what is on the ground floor of a building??

Plus any work has to meet present code.

Do you have someone working with you on this that can talk code??

The definition of a “ground floor” in chapter 2 is:

Ground floor" means a floor of a building with a building entrance on an accessible route.

The building has no accessible entrance to the units on the “ground floor” you have to go up a small flight of stairs to access them. Would they still be considered ground floor units under the ada code?

 

[ADAguy]

AS,
1. ADA is not a code, only a law with "minimum" guidelines
2. You have more that 3 apartments, in California it is a multifamily
3. You should be looking at CBC 11A for multifamily requirements
4. Since when is a laundry room not a common space?
5. If you don't want to have a common space laundry room in the basement, consider adding stacked units In each apartment, only plumbing & electrical permits required.

 

[cda]

The definition of a “ground floor” in chapter 2 is:

Ground floor" means a floor of a building with a building entrance on an accessible route.

The building has no accessible entrance to the units on the “ground floor” you have to go up a small flight of stairs to access them. Would they still be considered ground floor units under the ada code?

Sounds like a ground floor to me

Just depends on where you get the definition

 

[Yikes]

In this case, if the building is private - not publicly funded, and if the dwellings are not a place of business or "public use" , and if there is no "rental office" or other such place where business is conducted, then I don't see how ADA - or other accessibility codes - would apply to the dwellings.
The fact that the building was built in 1922 trumps everything, regardless of # of units. See 1102A.2 for existing buildings. You can add to a building or remodel a building and, unless you are creating an additional dwelling unit via additions and remodels,.you won't trigger calling any of the units "covered multifamily dwellings" subject to accessibility.

1102A.2 Existing buildings. The building standards contained in this chapter do not apply to the alteration, repair, rehabilitation or maintenance of multifamily dwellings constructed for first occupancy prior to March 13, 1991. Covered multifamily dwellings shall be maintained in compliance with the accessibility standards in effect at the time of construction. Apartments constructed prior to March 13, 1991 shall be maintained in compliance with the accessibility standards in effect at the time of construction.
Additions shall be subject to the requirements of this chapter, provided the addition, when considered alone, meets the definition of a covered multifamily dwelling, as defined in Chapter 2 [note: that's living+sleeping+cooking+sanitation facilities]. New common use spaces serving existing covered multifamily dwellings shall be subject to the requirements of this chapter.
Note: For all existing public use areas, public accommodations, and public housing, see Chapter 11B for provisions of the Division of the State Architect-Access Compliance (DSA-AC).