• Welcome to The Building Code Forum

    Your premier resource for building code knowledge.

    This forum remains free to the public thanks to the generous support of our Sawhorse Members and Corporate Sponsors. Their contributions help keep this community thriving and accessible.

    Want enhanced access to expert discussions and exclusive features? Learn more about the benefits here.

    Ready to upgrade? Log in and upgrade now.

Resealing & Relining Parking Lots with Accessible Parking Spaces

The Department’s guidance documents, including this guidance, do not establish legally enforceable responsibilities beyond what is required by the terms of the applicable statutes, regulations, or binding judicial precedent.
 
jar546 said:
Then you never looked close enough. This was something that I discussed with PA L&I back in the mid 2000's because it was in question in some municipalities. The director at the time, I think it was a John was adamant that resurfacing & resealing and relining did, in fact, require a permit and the L&I required permits and inspections on all of the properties they were in charge of in opt-out communities and state-owned buildings. As a matter of fact, during the conversation, I remember him telling me that Penn State main campus was under a permit for a major parking lot resurfacing. It was at that point that we made sure that all resealing, resurfacing projects were permitted in all of the municipalities we worked in.

It is required, it has been required. Why you don't enforce it is a question you have to ask yourself.
Click to expand...
I am not the BCO (AHJ) anywhere, just an inspector, and I don't know if the BCO is requiring it. I just never saw one in my 18 years of an inspector, and I do most of the commercial inspections here.
 
So if we did make them get a permit for resurfacing a parking lot I still don't know how we could make them paint new lines for an accessible parking spaces. For an existing building we would go to the 2018 IEBC:

SECTION 305
ACCESSIBILITY FOR EXISTING BUILDINGS
305.1 Scope. The provisions of Sections 305.1 through 305.9
apply to maintenance, change of occupancy, additions and
alterations to existing buildings, including those identified as
historic buildings.

I would think a parking lot resurface would be a repair. As you can see the above section there is nothing about accessibility for repairs.

If you think it is not a repair but an alteration to a primary function:

305.7 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 and 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.

If you think a parking lot is a primary function, they could choose to spend the 20% on something else than an accessible parking space.
 
Last edited:
This is not the first time we've been down this road. Let's go back 8 years ago.

Restriping Parking Spaces

Department of Justice has published an updated 4-page ADA technical assistance document, ADA Compliance Brief: Restriping Parking Spaces. The document provides information about the features of accessible car and van parking spaces and how many accessible spaces are required under the ADA when...
www.thebuildingcodeforum.com
 
No permits, but we have had success in enforcement when someone modifies it to non-compliance.
That wasn't just re-surfacing and re-painting. We've also have seasonal goods, pre-fab sheds, etc. stored on top of the parking space or encroaching on it.
 
Rick18071 said:
So if we did make them get a permit for resurfacing a parking lot I still don't know how we could make them paint new lines for an accessible parking spaces. For an existing building we would go to the 2018 IEBC:

SECTION 305
ACCESSIBILITY FOR EXISTING BUILDINGS
305.1 Scope. The provisions of Sections 305.1 through 305.9
apply to maintenance, change of occupancy, additions and
alterations to existing buildings, including those identified as
historic buildings.

I would think a parking lot resurface would be a repair. As you can see the above section there is nothing about accessibility for repairs.

If you think it is not a repair but an alteration to a primary function:

305.7 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 and 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.

If you think a parking lot is a primary function, they could choose to spend the 20% on something else than an accessible parking space.
Click to expand...
Restriping a parking lot to be the exactly the same striping pattern as it was before is not
“alterations affecting an area”. It’s the exact opposite. It is preserving the function of the existing area, making sure its use doesn’t change due to faded lines and worn out surfaces.
 
Rick18071 said:
So if we did make them get a permit for resurfacing a parking lot I still don't know how we could make them paint new lines for an accessible parking spaces. For an existing building we would go to the 2018 IEBC:

SECTION 305
ACCESSIBILITY FOR EXISTING BUILDINGS
305.1 Scope. The provisions of Sections 305.1 through 305.9
apply to maintenance, change of occupancy, additions and
alterations to existing buildings, including those identified as
historic buildings.

I would think a parking lot resurface would be a repair. As you can see the above section there is nothing about accessibility for repairs.

If you think it is not a repair but an alteration to a primary function:

305.7 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 and 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.

If you think a parking lot is a primary function, they could choose to spend the 20% on something else than an accessible parking space.
Click to expand...
Rick is kind of right here, not a great code path....I would use this section to "make it right" I think:

306.2 Design​

Buildings and facilities shall be designed and constructed to be accessible in accordance with this code and the alteration and existing building provisions in ICC A117.1, as applicable.

Or I guess if you call it a level 1 alteration, this:

306.7 Alterations​


A facility that is altered shall comply with the applicable provisions in Chapter 11 of the International Building Code,ICC A117.1 and the provisions of Sections 306.7.1 through 306.7.16, unless technically infeasible.
 
Alteration. A change to a building or facility that affects or could affect the usability of the building or facility or portion thereof. Alterations include, but are not limited to, remodeling, renovation, rehabilitation, reconstruction, historic restoration, resurfacing of circulation paths or vehicular ways, changes or rearrangement of the structural parts or elements, and changes or rearrangement in the plan configuration of walls and full-height partitions. Normal maintenance, reroofing, painting or wallpapering, asbestos removal, or changes to mechanical and electrical systems are not alterations unless they affect the usability of the building or facility.

Stop looking to the IEBC for reasons not to enforce the codes and standards as written.
 
jar546 said:
Stop looking to the IEBC for reasons not to enforce the codes and standards as written.
Click to expand...
Jeff...I know you know PA stuff, and I do not presume to, but our code requires us to use the IEBC for existing:

[A] 101.4.7 Existing Buildings​


The provisions of the International Existing Building Code shall apply to matters governing the repair, alteration, change of occupancy, addition to and relocation of existing buildings.

And of course I won't actually argue that the code has no jurisdiction over the parking lot because this section only says "buildings"
 
If it is existing, I am required to use the 2018 IEBC as written:

[A] ALTERATION. Any construction or renovation to an
existing structure other than a repair or addition.

A parking lot is not a structure.
 
classicT said:
Not sure I agree with that statement given the definition of a structure...

2021 IBC [A] STRUCTURE. That which is built or constructed.
Click to expand...
And in case anyone wants to point out that I am using an IBC definition for an existing structure...

2021 IEBC 201.3 Terms Defined in Other Codes​

Where terms are not defined in this code and are defined in the other International Codes, such terms shall have the meanings ascribed to them in those codes.
 
classicT said:
And in case anyone wants to point out that I am using an IBC definition for an existing structure...

2021 IEBC 201.3 Terms Defined in Other Codes​

Where terms are not defined in this code and are defined in the other International Codes, such terms shall have the meanings ascribed to them in those codes.
Click to expand...
So if you build a pile of dirt, it is a structure?
If you build a lake it would be a structure?
 
Today I sat through an hour and a half of webinar titled Accessible Residential Facilities. The entire time was spent bouncing around trying to pin down which set of regulations apply. Four federal laws, local laws and a dozen separate types of residential facilities. What are you doing to it, who owns it, who paid for it...is it for sale?

All of the codes are straight forward enough that a simple guy like me can read it and understand it. Chapter 11, while way to long, is not too cumbersome to figure out...however, toss in a ten unit three story apartment building built twenty-five years ago and now all bets are off. Somebody is going to get out in the weeds trying to decide what applies.

This bit of information exemplifies the consternation many feel towards ADA. The instructor pointed out that the maximum reach over a kitchen counter is 24". He went on to say that kitchen counters are usually 25" and have been for ages. The framers of the ADA chose 24" which doesn't work with electrical receptacles in a backsplash at a kitchen counter at 25" deep. "Been a problem forever". Ridiculous isn't it?
 
Rick18071 said:
So if you build a pile of dirt, it is a structure?
If you build a lake it would be a structure?
Click to expand...
Don't shoot the messenger. I just gave you what the code says.

But yes, quite possibly these could be structures, with both possibly having requirements under IBC Ch. 18 or Appendix J if adopted.
 
I'm glad I only need to enforce the IBC and not all the other regulations on accessibility. It must drive the architects nuts that do need to go by all the regulations.
 
The IEBC does require accessible parking if you follow the charging language. If parking is provided, then ICC A117.1 requires accessible parking.
So, if you have a non-compliant parking lot and you are restriping it then the work needs to include accessible parking unless it is technically infeasible.

IEBC

[A] FACILITY. All or any portion of buildings, structures, site improvements, elements and pedestrian or vehicular routes located on a site.

TECHNICALLY INFEASIBLE. An alteration of a facility that has little likelihood of being accomplished because the existing structural conditions require the removal or alteration of a load-bearing member that is an essential part of the structural frame, or because other existing physical or site constraints prohibit modification or addition of elements, spaces or features which are in full and strict compliance with the minimum requirements for new construction and which are necessary to provide accessibility.

CHAPTER 3
PROVISIONS FOR ALL COMPLIANCE METHODS

301.5 Compliance with accessibility.
Accessibility requirements for existing buildings shall comply with the 2009 edition of ICC A117.1.

305.2 Maintenance of facilities.
A facility that is constructed or altered to be accessible shall be maintained accessible during occupancy.

305.3 Extent of application.
An alteration of an existing facility shall not impose a requirement for greater accessibility than that which would be required for new construction.

305.9.1 Site arrival points.
Not fewer than one accessible route from a site arrival point to an accessible entrance shall be provided. (Accessible parking is a site arrival point.)

Chapter 5. General Site and Building Elements

501.1 Scope.
General site and building elements required to be accessible by the scoping provisions adopted by the administrative authority shall comply with the applicable provisions of Chapter 5.

502 Parking Spaces

502.1 General.
Accessible car and van parking spaces shall comply with Section 502.
 
Most of the parking lots in my area are gravel or just dirt with no painted lines. If they add more gravel or dirt and the building was built before we had codes (2004) and no accessible route or accessible anything in them, which most are like in my area, would you make them put in an accessible parking space?
 
Our inspection company already lost some townships because they thought we were too strict. I have seen lots of things while driving around that don't look kosher. I report it to the BCO. But from there I don't pay attention to what happens.
 
Rick18071 said:
would you make them put in an accessible parking space?
Click to expand...
No not until they actually do something to the building.

Part 2. State Building Code​

Alteration Of Primary Function Area​

50-60-214. Alteration of primary function area.......

(b) If the cost of altering a path of travel to an altered primary function area is disproportionate as provided in subsection (2)(a), the path of travel must be made accessible to the extent possible without incurring disproportionate costs. The alterations to the path of travel must be made by providing, in the following order or priority:

(i) an accessible entrance and accessible exterior route to the accessible entrance from accessible parking and passenger loading zones or from a public sidewalk if the public sidewalk is immediately adjacent to the public building site;

(ii) an accessible path of travel to the altered primary function area;

(iii) accessible restrooms for each sex or a single unisex restroom when allowed by the applicable building code; and

(iv) accessible elements, including but not limited to storage spaces and alarms.
 
Rick18071 said:
Our inspection company already lost some townships because they thought we were too strict. I have seen lots of things while driving around that don't look kosher. I report it to the BCO. But from there I don't pay attention to what happens.
Click to expand...
Another fine excuse to not do your job to the best of your ability. Inspect to a lesser standard and don't require things so you don't lose your contract. Awesome!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top