Multi-story buildings and accessibility

[jllcc]

I've read some other posts on here concerning the general topic but would like some feedback specific to a project and interested to hear feedback on a discrepancy between the IBC and ADA:

Scope:
Interior remodel of existing two story building, each floor over 4000 sq. ft. The interior renovation is being completed in two phases. The only alterations being performed during the first phase to the facility are on the first floor (only about 2000 sq. ft. being altered on first floor), no work whatsoever is occurring on the second floor. Existing second floor currently consists of multiple rooms, tenant plans to use 3 of them as offices (temporarily until second phase begins which will essentially be a complete gut of the second floor), the remaining 12+ rooms will be storage or not used. This was indicated on the plans per the intended use. There are two non ADA compliant restrooms on second floor, no water fountains.

Question:
Is an elevator required? Plan reviewer made note that per "section 1104 accessible route required to all primary functions = elevator or lift required"

Code references:
2015 IBC 1104.4 - For new construction, an accessible route connecting the stories would be required since it exceeds the 3000 sq. ft. exception.
2015 IEBC 705.2 - The terms 'alteration' and 'primary function' are important. One can argue that no 'alteration' is taking place on the second floor and that the 'primary function' of the facility will take place on the first floor. However, the fact that there are offices upstairs could be considered a primary function. The 20% of cost exception would likely apply to this project since the construction valuation is around 100k (this is technically the main reason why I determined an elevator would not be required).
2010 ADA 206.2.3 - exception - "In private buildings or facilities that are less than three stories or that have less than 3000 square feet (279 m2) per story, an accessible route shall not be required to connect stories". Interesting thing here is that ADA states three stories OR less than 3000. However, the IBC states only an exception for less than 3000 sq. ft. not for the # of stories. Per the ADA less that 3 stories exception, an accessible route would not be required.

Although my main questions concerns the elevator, any comments on whether the second floor restrooms would need to be brought up to ADA standards although no alterations are occurring on the second floor? If and 'alteration' is being performed to only one story and not the others, does it still trigger the same requirements for all stories?

Thoughts/Comments? Thanks in advance!

 

[cda]

Welcome

 

[steveray]

Is it a change of use? If not typically the required upgrades would be limited to 20% of the budget which might rule out an elevator as you stated....But bathrooms are fair game wherever they are...

 

[Francis Vineyard]

The 2nd floor in phase 1 would not be within the work area as documented on the plans.

Perhaps it should also be documented on the drawings, Chapter 5 sections that are applicable to differentiate between alterations (level 1) and reconfiguration of space or work area (level 2 & 3). In other words level 1 alterations do not reconfigure rooms or spaces.

WORK AREA. That portion or portions of a building consisting of all reconfigured spaces as indicated on the construction documents. Work area excludes other portions of the building where incidental work entailed by the intended work must be performed and portions of the building where work not initially intended by the owner is specifically required by this code.

The term "reconfigured space" is key to understanding the definition of "work area", and is used on its own to establish one type of level 2 alteration in section 504. The terms "reconfiguration of space" are not defined in the IBC but must be properly applied to accurately establish both work areas, and level 2 and 3 alterations.

Additionally in accordance to the exception of Section 801.1 “if the work area is exclusively the result of compliance with Section 705.2 (primary function) and the accessible route affects exits and/or corridors or other elements of the exit access, even if the work area exceeds 50% of the building area, you would not need to comply with Chapter 9” and the cost of this work is not inclusive of the amount applied towards the 20% cost.

801.1 Scope. Level 2 alterations as described in Section 504 shall comply with the requirements of this chapter.
Exception: Buildings in which the reconfiguration is exclusively the result of compliance with the accessibility requirements of Section 705.2 shall be permitted to comply with Chapter 7.

705.2 Alterations affecting an area containing a primary function. Where an alteration affects the accessibility to a, or contains an area of, primary function, the route to the primary function area shall be accessible.

 

[mtlogcabin]

However, the IBC states only an exception for less than 3000 sq. ft. not for the # of stories.

Because the IBC states aggregate then it is the sum of all floors above and below the accessible level

2012 IBC

1104.4 Multilevel buildings and facilities.
At least one accessible route shall connect each accessible level, including mezzanines, in multilevel buildings and facilities.

Exceptions:

1. An accessible route is not required to stories and mezzanines that have an aggregate area of not more than 3,000 square feet (278.7 m2) and are located above and below accessible levels

 

[ADAguy]

What we have here is the ongoing failure to understand the difference between ADA mandated barrier removal obligations even if no work is done vs IBC requirements which are not a safe harbor for ADA compliance.
1. 2nd floor restrooms should have been upgraded.
2. Employees temporarily using the 2nd floor if disabled could make a claim for Reasonable accommodation.
3. What is the intended use of the offices? Visits by clients?
4. 4,000 sq. ft per floor would appear to be in excess of the previous commentor and may have to be addressed when 2nd floor work commences.

 

[JCraver]

Illinois' accessibility code re-wrote that to be 1000 sf. Over that, you're putting in an elevator (provided that it's within the ~20% you have to spend, etc).

Be glad you don't live in Illinois (or California!).

 

[ADAguy]

Don't they still use ladders in Santa Fe (smiling)?

 

[jllcc]

Thanks everyone for all the immediate feedback. Will try and answer/comment on the various posts...

1. There will be a change of occupancy. My understanding that even a change of occupancy is considered an 'alteratio'n. Can also claim a partial change of occupancy.
2. The scope of work area was identified on the plans (only first floor work to be performed)
3. Second floor would technically classify as a change of occupancy alteration. First floor remodel is level 2 alteration.
4. Up to 20% of construction cost is required be spent for upgrading accessibility. Would technically require having to revise second story restrooms, although I'd rather not as the second phase will include the complete demo of these restrooms and new configuration with new fully accessible restrooms etc. The platform lift or elevator would exceed 20% cost of phase I.
5. Upstairs offices will only be used privately by owners, not for employee or public use.

Based on the work area, level of alteration, and more specifically based on the 20% of cost requirement, I'm gathering that there's a strong argument that an accessible route (i.e. elevator or platform lift) would not be required for this first phase. Do you agree?

Certainly for the second phase, we are anticipating the installation of a platform lift to provide the required accessible route to the second floor.

 

[steveray]

Change of occupancy or use does not stop at 20%...Route to PF area must comply.

 

[ADAguy]

You are still side stepping your ongoing ADA barrier removal obligation which must be done exclusive of any work/alterations being done.
Bet you still have knob hardware?

 

[mtlogcabin]

Barrier removal does not require the installation of an elevator since it could be a burdensome exspense

If an area of my store is reachable only by a flight of steps, would I be required to add an elevator?

Usually no. A public accommodation generally would not be required to remove a barrier to physical access posed by a flight of steps, if removal would require extensive ramping or an elevator. The readily achievable standard does not require barrier removal that requires burdensome expense. Thus, where it is not readily achievable to do so, the ADA would not require a public accommodation to provide access to an area reachable only by a flight of stairs.

https://www.ada.gov/reachingout/factor.html

 

[Francis Vineyard]

3. Second floor would technically classify as a change of occupancy alteration. First floor remodel is level 2 alteration.
4. Up to 20% of construction cost is required be spent for upgrading accessibility. Would technically require having to revise second story restrooms, although I'd rather not as the second phase will include the complete demo of these restrooms and new configuration with new fully accessible restrooms etc. The platform lift or elevator would exceed 20% cost of phase I.

To further clarify a change of occupancy does not necessarily require reconfiguration and alterations (Ref. 1003.1).

In reference to the restrooms the 20% is applicable towards the route to the restroom or drinking fountains (if provided) that serve the primary function area.

It is not mandatory that restrooms be made accessible except if reconfigured or is new (including if not on an accessible level). In other words "if an alteration is limited to changes or replacement of certain elements, such as a fixture and floor surfaces, these elements must comply, at a minimum. Work that is more extensive and involves alteration of the entire room typically triggers full compliance."

ACCESSIBLE. A site, building, facility or portion thereof that complies with Chapter 11.

ACCESSIBLE ROUTE. A continuous, unobstructed path that complies with Chapter 11.

 

[steveray]

CT added the bathroom to COU...My bad

(Amd) 1012.8.2 Complete change of occupancy. Where an entire building undergoes a change
of occupancy, it shall comply with Section 1012.8.1 and 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 of the 2012 International Building Code portion of the
State Building Code.
4. Accessible parking, complying with Section 1106 of the 2012 International Building Code
portion of the State Building Code, where parking is being provided.
5. At least one accessible passenger loading zone, when passenger loading zones are
provided.
6. At least one accessible route connecting accessible parking and accessible passenger
loading zones to an accessible entrance.
7. At least one accessible toilet room or toilet and bathing facility complying with Section
1109.2.3 of the 2012 International Building Code portion of the State Building Code.

 

[steveray]

705.2 Alterations affecting an area containing a primary
function. Where an alteration affects the accessibility to a, 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.
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.

The bathrooms are part of the route and are required to be upgraded (at some point)unless the building is already compliant or you spent your 20% in other parts of the route...

 

[ADAguy]

Not a good idea to "only" provide an accessible POT to a restroom that is not compliant and not have an accessible RR elsewhere.
This does become a cost to benefit issue with many owners but owners must eventually make existing noncompliant RRs compliant even if not doing alterations (per the ADA, not per IBC).

 

[Francis Vineyard]

Chapter 5 provides that level one (1) alterations do not include reconfiguration of space (walls moved or removed); as a reminder changes in ceiling height does not reconfigure the room or space (Ref. 703.1). However Section 705.1 in reference to 705.2 is applicable in accordance to Section 806 where included in the work area.

I notice in my post #13 there's an error (and probably more) where the 2015 changed the word from or to and; toilet facilities "and" drinking fountains.

Additionally there was a proposal for the 2015 to include toilet facilities like CT did to be consistent with the historical building change of occupancy.

 

[Francis Vineyard]

I would like to see IEBC reorganized; remove reconfiguration provision out of chapter 7 to 8, or combine chapters 7 - 9 and 10 instead of an NFPA layout. Get rid of chapter 11 and reference IBC as applicable . . .

Anxious to see Virginia 2015 IEBC; I'm hearing ideas similar to the above, granted though I'm hard of hearing.

 

[PJC89]

There will be some portion of the renovation budget that will have to be dedicated to barrier removal but need not exceed 20% of the renovation budget. This theoretically should have been taking place over several years. I am no ADA expert but would recommend taking a look through the checklist of barrier removal requirements in existing buildings:

https://www.ada.gov/racheck.pdf

https://up.codes/viewer/adaag_2004