Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 125.1352 (2026)

Compliance of public facility with barrier free design requirements; leases and rentals by state or political subdivisions; approval of state or local administrative authority as condition of construction, lease, building permit, or certificate of occupancy; displaying, issuing, making, and distributing symbols of access; “building” defined; penalty.

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

UTILIZATION OF PUBLIC FACILITIES BY PHYSICALLY LIMITED

Act 1 of 1966

125.1352 Compliance of public facility with barrier free design requirements; leases and rentals by state or political subdivisions; approval of state or local administrative authority as condition of construction, lease, building permit, or certificate of occupancy; displaying, issuing, making, and distributing symbols of access; “building” defined; penalty.

Sec. 2.

(1) A public facility or facility used by the public the contract for construction of which or the first contract for construction of a portion of which is made after July 2, 1974, shall meet the barrier free design requirements contained in the state construction code.

(2) An existing public facility or facility used by the public undergoing a change in use group or occupancy load, or an alteration other than ordinary maintenance, after July 20, 1975, shall meet the barrier free design requirements contained in the state construction code according to the following:

(a) If the change in use group or occupancy load, or alteration, involves less than 50% of the floor area of the public facility or facility used by the public which can be used by the public or employees, only the area affected, and areas necessary to provide a continuous and unobstructed route of travel to and from the affected areas from and including the nearest entrance, shall be required to meet the barrier free design requirements of the state construction code.

(b) If the change in use group or occupancy load, or alteration, involves 50% or more of the floor area of the public facility or facility used by the public which can be occupied by the public or employees, the entire public facility or facility used by the public shall meet the barrier free design requirements of the state construction code.

(3) If a building, structure, or improved area is a public facility solely by reason of lease or rental of a portion thereof by the state or its political subdivisions, the portion not so leased or rented shall not be required to be altered to meet the barrier free design requirements unless required by subsection (2) or unless the portion rented by the state or its political subdivisions, or a combination thereof, represents 50% or more of the floor area of the public facility that can be occupied by the public or employees.

(4) Approval of the appropriate state administrative authority shall be secured before the award of a construction contract or the execution by the lessee of a lease for a public facility to be owned or occupied by the state or its political subdivisions, and the approval of the appropriate local or state administrative authority shall be secured before the issuance of a building permit or certificate of occupancy for a facility used by the public or a public facility which will not be owned or occupied by the state or its political subdivisions.

(5) A building which meets the requirements of this act shall display the symbol of access as provided for in the general rules of the state construction code. The appropriate administrative authority, under section 3, upon certification that the building, structure or improved area has met the requirements of section 2 of this act and the barrier free design requirements contained in the state construction code, shall issue symbols as are required to the facility manager for display. The department of corrections shall make the symbols available to the administrative authorities. Methods of distribution of the symbols shall be developed by the issuing bodies. When used in this section, the term "building" notwithstanding its definition in Michigan Compiled Laws 125.1502 section 2(e) of the state construction code, shall include, in addition to those buildings otherwise included, those buildings constructed in whole or in part with funds of the state or any of its political subdivisions.

(6) A person who displays or causes to be displayed a symbol of access on a facility used by the public which symbol of access does not comply with this act is subject to a fine of $250.00.

History: 1966, Act 1, Eff. July 1, 1966 ;-- Am. 1970, Act 243, Eff. July 1, 1971 ;-- Am. 1974, Act 190, Imd. Eff. July 2, 1974 ;-- Am. 1975, Act 177, Imd. Eff. July 20, 1975 ;-- Am. 1979, Act 137, Imd. Eff. Nov. 7, 1979

AdminRule Notes:

R 408.30427 et seq. of the Michigan Administrative Code.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 5 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1986–2023 · leading case: Carr v. Gen. Motors Corp., 389 N.W.2d 686 (Mich. 1986).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Carr v. Gen. Motors Corp., 389 N.W.2d 686 (Mich. 1986). · cites it 2× “Although MCL 125.1352; MSA 3.447(122) provides that alterations need only be made to public facilities of which the contract for construction or the "first contract for construction of a portion .”

Kristopher William Robert Wilson v. Brk Inc (Mich. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 5× “1351 and MCL 125.1352. In reference to the FCN, the inspector acknowledged that it came from the township’s files, but she could not tell who authored the notice or when it was prepared.”

Joseph Audette v. Tbwc Props. Inc (Mich. Ct. App. 2023). · cites it 3× “Finally, plaintiffs advance somewhat perplexing arguments concerning the special-aspects exception to the open-and-obvious doctrine and the requirement for public facilities to maintain a barrier-free design pursuant to MCL 125.1352(1). Neither position was raised in the trial…”

Rosalie Rockov v. Lilley Pointe Condo. Ass'n (Mich. Ct. App. 2020). “A barrier-free design that eliminates hindrances that deter physically limited persons from having access and free mobility to buildings is generally required under MCL 125.1352(1) and MCL 125.1351(b). Accordingly, the trial court erred by determining that the open and obvious…”

Sch. Dist. of Pontiac v. City of Auburn Hills, 460 N.W.2d 258 (Mich. Ct. App. 1990). “[MCL 125.1352; MSA 3.447(122).] The use of the phrase in this manner contemplates its application to both existing facilities (subsection 2) and facilities not yet built (subsection 1).”

— Mich. Comp. Laws § 125.1352(1) — 3 cases

Kristopher William Robert Wilson v. Brk Inc (Mich. Ct. App. 2019). “1351 and MCL 125.1352. In reference to the FCN, the inspector acknowledged that it came from the township’s files, but she could not tell who authored the notice or when it was prepared.”

Joseph Audette v. Tbwc Props. Inc (Mich. Ct. App. 2023). “Finally, plaintiffs advance somewhat perplexing arguments concerning the special-aspects exception to the open-and-obvious doctrine and the requirement for public facilities to maintain a barrier-free design pursuant to MCL 125.1352(1). Neither position was raised in the trial…”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.