Existing buildings have provisions in some cases, no?

Not for areas of new work - OP specified adding courtrooms. All new work must comply.

Yep, I reread it more carefully. Gotta redesign instead of simply replicating the prior design.

^underrated comment of the day

Not all building officials are qualified to tell you what is required!

Therein lies the difference between ASK your building official and TALK TO your building official.

can I text my building official instead?

What interpretation? It's black and white!

You'd be surprised how much interpretation is allowed. I've had code officials out right say they aren't going to allow something because they don't like the section of the code that permits it.

Then that plans examiner would look like an ass during the appeal.

poop, unless directed by the client, and the reading isn't cost prohibitive, appealing is a fools errand.

I would appeal plans examiners "not liking" something on my own dime!

Well, I would as well, if I were develop, design build, but then I'm the money and the client.

Apparently you didn't understand the point of SneakyPete's comment, "Therein lies the difference between ASK your building official and TALK TO your building official." Reaching out to the building department for their interpretation is asking rather than talking.

In addition they are not liable for any of it and it's all on the professional.

Plenty of building officials care about Chapter 11 of the code and ANSI/ICC A117.1. But you’re right that ADA is not their jurisdiction.

Our state and local building officials review and inspect for compliance with ANSI/ICC A117.1.

Chad, here, it's hit or miss, no laws, but if the code official is an architect, they err on the right side, but they're not required to.

True. It's just that the few areas I've worked the building department did ADA review and inspection.

I've run into that more with For Profit third party groups.

Interesting. May I ask roughly what part of the US you practice in? Myself it's MN and CO.

That's too funny. So do I.

b3ta, is Chad just another one of your personalities and this whole time you've been talking with yourself?

That would be, false, but it does make for an interesting story.

That's a mistake. However, you will need to review existing building codes for any relevant questions, but I suspect that you will find that once construction exceeds a certain dollar amount, you will have criteria to follow with respect to accessibility. Then, it is, an ADA issue.

This isn't necessarily correct. In the 2018 IBC existing building code there are several compliance paths, each have different thresholds for making the building and it's parts ADA compliant.

ADA: Civil Rights Legislation. Can get the client sued. While guidelines are provided, there is no guarantee that following them to the letter protects you from lawsuits if the lawyers can prove you did not comply with the law.

IBC: Code. Adopted by the State verbatim or modified. Not Civil Rights Legislation. Often includes ANSI A117.1. This is what code officials are checking against. ANSI A117.1 tracks closely with the ADA guidelines but some variation exists.

Local Codes (mostly in cities): State Code with local amendments. Some cities adopt extra language that tightens the accessibility requirements.

^underrated comment of the day

I feel like you (EA) should do a weekly aggregation of the "underrated comments of the day".

Chad - Existing building provisions apply only to those parts of the building you're not otherwise touching with the project. The specific area of alteration always needs to comply with current Code. Example (from the OP): If you are gutting an existing interior space and remodeling into a new courtroom, then everything inside that room must comply with current Code; the EBC applies once you leave the altered room and enter the existing corridor.

OP refers to modifying existing courtrooms, not converting spaces into courtrooms (tho OP also mentions adding courtrooms )

I'm guessing they might not have to do anything if they aren't really altering the space, unless the client is requesting upgrades everywhere & then it's a question of what is possible in the space

They are entirely new courtrooms, to be clear.

alrighty, then...ignore the above comment

The "existing courtrooms" I reference in the original post are elsewhere in the courthouse.