The scheduled accessibility programme for existing public buildings

The act on equal rights, opportunities, participation and citizenship for disabled people required every existing building open to the public to be made accessible before 1 January 2015. For new buildings the obligations applied immediately. The ten-year period granted for existing buildings proved widely insufficient: at the deadline, fewer than 40 % of the buildings concerned were compliant.

Faced with that, the government created the programme by ordinance. It allowed any operator of a non-compliant building to file with the prefecture a written undertaking to carry out the works within a defined period. In exchange, the operator was protected from the criminal sanctions attached to the accessibility obligation, provided the approved programme was respected.

The programme covered every existing non-compliant building open to the public, whatever its category. A chain of 40 restaurants could file a portfolio programme covering all its establishments. A doctor practising on a third floor without a lift could file an individual programme for the surgery. Local authority buildings — town halls, libraries, sports halls — were equally subject, with the option of a master accessibility scheme for transport operators.

ℹ The periods have long expired for the earliest programmes A programme filed in 2015 for three years should have been completed in 2018. Buildings covered by programmes filed in 2015 are in principle either compliant or liable to sanction. Buildings that never filed a programme, or that did not meet its terms, are in breach and exposed to sanction. Filing a new programme has been impossible since 31 March 2019. An operator who never filed one can therefore no longer regularise their position by this route: what remains is to carry out the works and file the corresponding consents.

Before filing, the operator commissioned an accessibility survey from a competent professional — an architect or an accessibility consultant. It identified the non-conformities zone by zone — access, circulation, sanitary accommodation, parking, specific equipment — and assessed the cost of the works. That document was the basis of the file.

The file comprised a description of the works planned for each period, an execution timetable, a financial estimate, and justification for any derogations sought. For buildings requiring planning permission, the application had to include the programme documents.

The file was filed with the prefecture of the department where the building sits, or with the municipality for some fifth-category buildings. The prefect had four months to approve or reject it, with silence constituting tacit approval.

That procedure is described in the past tense: filing has been impossible since 31 March 2019. What survives is the modification of an already approved programme, provided for in the construction and housing code, to bring in new buildings, merge programmes or extend a period initially granted.

Progress reports were required at mid-term for programmes running more than one period. A completion certificate was drawn up at the end and sent to the prefecture. It could be produced by the architect leading the works or by a technical control office.

A derogation could be granted where compliance was technically impossible because of constraints in the existing fabric: a load-bearing structure fixing an unmodifiable floor, insufficient ceiling height for a compliant ramp, no possibility of fitting a lift within the existing envelope.

Buildings within listed monuments could obtain derogations where accessibility works would damage the conservation of historic fabric. The heritage architect's opinion was required.

A derogation could be granted where the cost of the works was manifestly disproportionate to the value of the building or to the turnover of the business. That criterion was assessed case by case by the accessibility commission and was generally applied to small, low-margin fifth-category establishments.

A building open to the public that does not meet its accessibility obligations — with no approved programme, or with one whose terms were not respected — is exposed to criminal sanctions: a fine of up to 45,000 € for a corporate body, rising to 225,000 € on a repeat offence, and administrative closure. In practice enforcement varies between authorities, but a complaint from a disability association can trigger a prefectural investigation.

ℹ ✔ Summary for the economist First check whether the building has an approved programme still running. Prior accessibility survey: 1,500 – 5,000 € excl. VAT according to area. Preparing the file: 1,500 – 4,000 € excl. VAT of fees. Average accessibility works budget for a fifth-category retail unit: 15,000 – 50,000 € excl. VAT. The lift is the costliest item and often the blocking one in older buildings. A well-argued derogation can avoid works that are impossible or disproportionate.

Accessibility obligations for new buildings open to the public are developed in the accessibility article. The public-building article places the programme within the wider regulatory framework. The refurbishment article covers more broadly the obligations triggered by works on an existing building. For hotels, the hotel article sets out the specific regime for buildings with sleeping accommodation.

ℹ The construction economist on demand. Bringing a public building into accessibility compliance? Quostra assesses the works required, identifies the derogations available and prices the budget envelope.

Sources: the act of 11 February 2005; the ordinance of 26 September 2014 and its implementing decree of 5 November 2014; the order of 8 December 2014 on the programme file; and the accessibility order of 1 August 2006 as amended.