• Welcome to the new and improved Building Code Forum. We appreciate you being here and hope that you are getting the information that you need concerning all codes of the building trades. This is a free forum to the public due to the generosity of the Sawhorses, Corporate Supporters and Supporters who have upgraded their accounts. If you would like to have improved access to the forum please upgrade to Sawhorse by first logging in then clicking here: Upgrades

Speakeasy

mark handler

Sawhorse
Joined
Oct 25, 2009
Messages
11,133
Location
So. CA
I am in CO, but as I read it, the space is very small and meets the exception for under 3,000ft² and directly below the accessible level.
You do know 1104.4 Multistory Buildings and Facilities, does not say you do not need access. It says one accessible route shall connect each accessible story , it does not exempt it from access from the outside.

Colorado Building Code

  • 1104.4 Multistory Buildings and Facilities
  • At least one accessible route shall connect each accessible story, mezzanine and occupied roofs in multilevel buildings and facilities.
 

Sifu

Sawhorse
Joined
Sep 3, 2011
Messages
1,645
You do know 1104.4 Multistory Buildings and Facilities, does not say you do not need access. It says one accessible route shall connect each accessible story , it does not exempt it from access from the outside.

Colorado Building Code

  • 1104.4 Multistory Buildings and Facilities
  • At least one accessible route shall connect each accessible story, mezzanine and occupied roofs in multilevel buildings and facilities.
The exception says if the aggregate area of the story above and below is less than 3,000ft² then no accessible route is required. The 3,000ft² does not include the level that is accessible. The proposed addition is very small and meets the criteria of the exception, is not a health care provider, a government building or a transportation facility. How am I misunderstanding this?
 

RLGA

Sawhorse
Joined
Oct 18, 2009
Messages
2,662
Location
Phoenix, AZ
The exception says if the aggregate area of the story above and below is less than 3,000ft² then no accessible route is required. The 3,000ft² does not include the level that is accessible. The proposed addition is very small and meets the criteria of the exception, is not a health care provider, a government building or a transportation facility. How am I misunderstanding this?
You are correct that it does not include the level that is accessible, but it does say this:

"...that have an aggregate area of not more than 3,000 square feet (278.7 m2) and are located above and below accessible levels."​
You have to include the areas of the upper floors and the basements in the aggregate--not each level individually. This is stated in the Commentary:

"This exception applies to stories, mezzanines or occupied roofs above and below the entry level that have an aggregate area of 3,000 square feet (279 m2) or less. The 3,000 square feet does not include the area of the accessible level. For example, if a building had a second floor that is 2,000 square feet (186 m2) and a basement that is 2,000 square feet (186 m2), since the aggregate area of the basement and second floor is 4,000 square feet (372 m2), at least one of the two floor areas would be required to be connected to the entrance level by an accessible route."​
 

RLGA

Sawhorse
Joined
Oct 18, 2009
Messages
2,662
Location
Phoenix, AZ
Sifu, my comment above assumes you have a second story above the main accessible level, or did I misinterpret your previous post about a 2-story Group A-2?
 

Sifu

Sawhorse
Joined
Sep 3, 2011
Messages
1,645
We have an A2 (restaurant & bar) on the main level. It has a small basement they want to use as a bar. It is well under the 3000ft². By my understanding, the basement would not require an accessible route. In this case, the establishment is under one owner and connected, even though the lower bar will be separate from the upper bar. Drinkers have a choice to go in the main floor or the basement, the booze is coming from the same establishment.

I have seen enforcement of this vary from 1) acceptable as long as the same services are provided on both levels, to 2) acceptable even if a completely different service as long as the exception is met, to 3) not allowed at all without an accessible route. My understanding is that it is acceptable, no matter what the service, if it meets the criteria in the exception.

You misunderstood, but maybe I should have been more clear. I do understand the aggregate area requirement, that if for example, the basement was 1500ft², and a third floor was 2000ft², the aggregate would be 3500ft² and one of the two levels would then be required to have an accessible route. That is not the case here.
 

RLGA

Sawhorse
Joined
Oct 18, 2009
Messages
2,662
Location
Phoenix, AZ
We have an A2 (restaurant & bar) on the main level. It has a small basement they want to use as a bar. It is well under the 3000ft². By my understanding, the basement would not require an accessible route. In this case, the establishment is under one owner and connected, even though the lower bar will be separate from the upper bar. Drinkers have a choice to go in the main floor or the basement, the booze is coming from the same establishment.

I have seen enforcement of this vary from 1) acceptable as long as the same services are provided on both levels, to 2) acceptable even if a completely different service as long as the exception is met, to 3) not allowed at all without an accessible route. My understanding is that it is acceptable, no matter what the service, if it meets the criteria in the exception.

You misunderstood, but maybe I should have been more clear. I do understand the aggregate area requirement, that if for example, the basement was 1500ft², and a third floor was 2000ft², the aggregate would be 3500ft² and one of the two levels would then be required to have an accessible route. That is not the case here.
Understood. Thanks for clarifying.
 
Top