# Accessible 2nd exit?



## Robert (Dec 2, 2017)

Hello. I'm working on a pre 1990 veterinary clinic (in CA). Alterations require 20% of construction cost go toward accessibility compliance. The main entry is accessible. The rear entry is not (3' above grade) but is required because of interior travel distance. According to CBC, the "pecking order" of which items to upgrade begin with the entry, then the path of travel to the area of work, then restrooms, telephones, water fountain, then parking. Where does the rear exit come in? It is a life safety issue so it seems it would come before the bathrooms.


----------



## mark handler (Dec 2, 2017)

No it would be one of the last items
After everything else
It is very rare that it would be used.
If it were new, per other sections in the code it woul ned to be accessible but not in a remodel.


----------



## Robert (Dec 2, 2017)

Thanks Mark.


----------



## steveray (Dec 4, 2017)

Big breaks for accessible egress in existing buildings....


----------



## ADAguy (Dec 4, 2017)

Seems illogical that safety would take second fiddle to Access? If they can enter a building, shouldn't they be able to exit too?


----------



## steveray (Dec 4, 2017)

Typically the one entrance or accessible route you would get in a change of use gets you one exit too....Other than that they get to spend the 20% however they want...


----------



## mark handler (Dec 4, 2017)

ADAguy said:


> Seems illogical that safety would take second fiddle to Access? If they can enter a building, shouldn't they be able to exit too?


Risk management


----------



## mtlogcabin (Dec 5, 2017)

1007.1 Accessible means of egress required.

Exceptions:

1.    Accessible means of egress are not required in alterations to existing buildings.


----------



## Rick18071 (Dec 5, 2017)

2009 IBC 1007.1  Exception 1: Accessible means of egress are not required in alterations to existing buildings.

Definition, Alteration: Any Construction or renovation to an existing structure other than a repair of addition.

So repairs, additions, and change of occupancy still needs an accessible means of egress.


----------



## mtlogcabin (Dec 5, 2017)

Rick18071 said:


> So repairs, additions, and change of occupancy still needs an accessible means of egress.


Not correct. Look at the IEBC, no where is an accessible means of egress required in an existing building for repairs or a change of occupancy.  


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 International Building Code.

4.    Accessible parking, where parking is provided.

5.    At least one accessible passenger loading zone, where loading zones are provided.

6.    At least one accessible route connecting accessible parking and accessible passenger loading zones to an accessible entrance.

1105.1 Minimum requirements.
Accessibility provisions for new construction shall apply to additions. An addition that affects the accessibility to, or contains an area of, primary function shall comply with the requirements of Sections 705, 806 and 906, as applicable.

No where does the IEBC send you to the IBC to require a second accessible means of egress.


----------



## mark handler (Dec 5, 2017)

Rick18071 said:


> 2009 IBC 1007.1  Exception 1: Accessible means of egress are not required in alterations to existing buildings.
> Definition, Alteration: Any Construction or renovation to an existing structure other than a repair of addition.
> So repairs, additions, and change of occupancy still needs an accessible means of egress.


That section, Not applicable, in CA


----------



## Yikes (Dec 12, 2017)

_2016 California Building Code 1009.1 exception #1:  Accessible means of egress are not required in existing buildings._

So then the question is, does an alteration to an existing building then force you to provide an accessible means of egress?
CBC 11B-202.3 requires alterations themselves to comply with 11B-202.4 "Path of Travel Requirements in alterations, additions, and structural Repairs."  It appears that only 202.4 requires accessibility modifications to building components (that are not otherwise being contemplated for alteration), and it's a very limited list of items:
1.  _A_ [one] primary entrance _to_ [NOT "all exits from"] the building or facility
2.  Toilet and bathing facilities serving the area
3.  Drinking fountains serving the area
4.  Public phones serving the area
5.  Signs.​Notice - no mention of egress, only entrance is required.
Now, it very often happens that a primary entrance is also functioning as an exit, and so if you make the entrance accessible, you're most of the way there to making made it an accessible egress as well.  Nevertheless, accessible means of _egress _is NOT automatically required for alterations to existing buildings.

The second thing to note is that CBC 202.4 exception #8 does NOT say you MUST spend 20% of your budget on accessibility.
It says you must provide the 5 items mentioned above, but you can stop once you've spent 20% of your construction budget.
For example, if your alteration budget was $200k, and you could achieve items #1-5 by only spending $10k, the code does not compel you to keep making more and more modifications (such as to the 3' high exit) in order to spend down $40k (20%) of your budget.

But the third thing to point out is, of course, that this is purely about the building code requirements.  This does not address ADA, which 
(because it is enforced in civil court, not by building permit) may have more requirements than the CBC.
for example, you may only be remodeling the operating room in the veterinary clinic, and the CBC could not compel you to have an accessible reception / bill paying counter.  But good practice for ADA compliance may require it, even though the CBC (and the local code official) does not.


----------



## Builder Bob (Dec 12, 2017)

Restrooms would come first, as people have to pee more than escape fires......


----------



## Builder Bob (Dec 12, 2017)

also, generally the code exempts or allows by exception to eliminate the requirement for  a second means of accessible egress in existing buildings.


----------



## Yikes (Dec 13, 2017)

Builder Bob said:


> Restrooms would come first, as people have to pee more than escape fires......


Reminds me of 80's movie _Strange Brew_, where IIRC both activities are combined at the end.


----------



## steveray (Dec 14, 2017)

Good movie....Not like oscar good, but you know what I mean eh'!


----------

