FHA, ADA, and Local Building Departments: Clarifying Responsibilities and Enforcement Authority

Building officials play a crucial role in ensuring accessibility within their jurisdictions by enforcing state and local building codes that often incorporate or align with federal accessibility standards established by the Fair Housing Act (FHA) and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Understanding the scope of their authority and responsibilities is essential for effective enforcement and compliance.

Federal Accessibility Laws: FHA and ADA

The FHA and ADA are federal civil rights laws designed to prevent discrimination based on disability. The FHA focuses on accessibility in housing, requiring that multifamily housing built after March 13, 1991, includes specific accessible features. The ADA, on the other hand, addresses accessibility in public accommodations and services, impacting areas such as leasing offices, public restrooms, and other common-use areas within housing developments. Enforcement of these federal laws falls under the purview of federal agencies like the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for the FHA and the Department of Justice (DOJ) for the ADA.

State and Local Building Codes: Integration with Federal Standards

Many states adopt building codes such as the International Building Code (IBC), which references the ANSI A117.1 standard for accessible and usable buildings and facilities. Chapter 11 of the IBC outlines accessibility requirements, effectively integrating aspects of the FHA and ADA into state regulations. This incorporation means that compliance with state building codes often aligns with federal accessibility standards. However, it's important to note that while these codes are designed to mirror federal requirements, they are enforced at the state and local levels, and compliance with local codes does not automatically guarantee compliance with federal laws.

Role of Local Building Officials

Local building officials are responsible for enforcing state and local building codes, including accessibility provisions. Their authority does not extend to directly enforcing federal laws like the FHA and ADA; instead, they ensure that construction and renovation projects comply with the adopted codes within their jurisdiction. By enforcing these codes, which often align with federal standards, building officials indirectly support compliance with the FHA and ADA. However, ultimate responsibility for adherence to federal laws rests with property owners, developers, and design professionals.

The Florida Example: A Unified Approach

Florida provides a notable example of integrating federal accessibility standards into state building codes. The state enacted the "Florida Americans with Disabilities Accessibility Implementation Act" to align its accessibility requirements with the ADA while maintaining certain more stringent state provisions. The Florida Building Code (FBC) incorporates these standards, and compliance with the FBC is considered to provide presumption of compliance with the ADA Standards. This approach simplifies enforcement for local building officials, as adherence to the state code ensures alignment with federal accessibility requirements. The Building Code Forum

Key Responsibilities of Building Officials

To effectively uphold accessibility standards, building officials should:

• Stay Informed: Regularly update their knowledge of both state and federal accessibility requirements to ensure that the codes they enforce remain aligned with current standards.
• Educate Stakeholders: Provide guidance to developers, architects, and property owners about the importance of complying with accessibility standards and the potential legal implications of non-compliance.
• Conduct Thorough Reviews and Inspections: Ensure that plans and completed constructions meet all applicable accessibility requirements as outlined in state and local codes.
• Collaborate with Federal Agencies: When necessary, coordinate with agencies like HUD and the DOJ to address compliance issues that fall under federal jurisdiction.HUD

TBCF Summary

While local building officials do not have the authority to directly enforce federal laws such as the FHA and ADA, they play a vital role in promoting accessibility through the enforcement of state and local building codes that often mirror federal standards. By ensuring compliance with these codes, building officials contribute significantly to creating inclusive and accessible environments within their communities.

 

[teej]

What happens in FLA when ADA and local codes conflict and they don't exactly "mirror"?
Is it a handshake or an arm wrestle?

play a vital role in promoting accessibility through the enforcement of state and local building codes that often mirror federal standards.

 

[Yikes]

What happens in FLA when ADA and local codes conflict and they don't exactly "mirror"?
Is it a handshake or an arm wrestle?

Example, toilet spacing from side wall:
ADA: 17” min to 19” max
California Building Code 11B for public housing: 17” min to 18” max
FHA: 18” EXACTLY (no stated tolerance)

I’ve had a CASp tell me the only solution in California that they will accept as meeting both CBC and FHA is a 17.75-18”range.
So that’s really telling the plumber to install at 17.875” plus or minus 0.125”.
Do you know plumbers who can set a toilet with 1/8” accuracy? At both the front and back of the toilet?

 

[Yankee Chronicler]

What happens in FLA when ADA and local codes conflict and they don't exactly "mirror"?
Is it a handshake or an arm wrestle?

There's a difference between "conflict" and "don't mirror."

Yikes' example of the toilet installation is a good example. One code/standard says 17" to 19". Another code/standard says 17" to 18". A third code says 18" exactly.

The three codes do not mirror one another, but there is no conflict. Ignoring the practical impossibility of hitting 18" exactly, from a code perspective a toilet installed at 18" from the side wall would be in full compliance with all three codes/standards. That's not a conflict.

A conflict would be if one code required 17" and another code required 19" -- meaning that it would not be possible to satisfy both codes in the same installation.

 

[arwat23]

What happens in FLA when ADA and local codes conflict and they don't exactly "mirror"?
Is it a handshake or an arm wrestle?

The most strict one applies. If ADA is more strict and is applicable, that applies. If local code is more strict and is applicable, then local code applies. But when something is completely different, like the example Yankee Chronicler wrote, then Federal Law generally applies (and the state will need to fix their code). Federal beats State beats local.

Regarding Yikes' example, I've read through a few court records for ADA lawsuits and, broadly speaking and depending on the element and what code calls for, a tolerance of 1/4" to 1/2" for code dimensions without a range are generally accepted in court. Not on plans obviously - those need to be exactly to code - but if the contractor is off by 1/4" when a plan says "exactly 18 inches", a court will typically find that acceptable. I would assume this tolerance would also apply to the FHA guidelines, but I don't work on many housing projects, so grain of salt.

 

[Yikes]

The most strict one applies. If ADA is more strict and is applicable, that applies. If local code is more strict and is applicable, then local code applies. But when something is completely different, like the example Yankee Chronicler wrote, then Federal Law generally applies (and the state will need to fix their code). Federal beats State beats local.

Regarding Yikes' example, I've read through a few court records for ADA lawsuits and, broadly speaking and depending on the element and what code calls for, a tolerance of 1/4" to 1/2" for code dimensions without a range are generally accepted in court. Not on plans obviously - those need to be exactly to code - but if the contractor is off by 1/4" when a plan says "exactly 18 inches", a court will typically find that acceptable. I would assume this tolerance would also apply to the FHA guidelines, but I don't work on many housing projects, so grain of salt.

I agree that the court will probably make a finding of tolerance. My clients are trying to avoid court in the first place.
I have another not-for-profit client with a public housing project that passed 2 CASp inspections. There was a tenant that was months behind in paying their rent and was going to get evicted. They got a housing rights lawyer to claim discrimination based on a physical barrier, and now the tenant has whistleblower protection and can't be evicted (even as they are not paying rent) until the case is resolved in court. My client is confident that the court will find the "barrier" in question does comply, and my client will ultimately prevail.
But my client's goal is not merely to prevail - - their goal is to not get dragged into court in the first place.

 

[arwat23]

But my client's goal is not merely to prevail - - their goal is to not get dragged into court in the first place.

Nothing, not even exact compliance, will stop that. If someone wants you in court, they can make it happen through ignorance or malice. It might backfire on them spectacularly, but that doesn't solve the short-term issue.

Edit: There's a guy who goes around suing a lot of people that do commercial project in the county, especially in high-traffic areas. A lot of the time he has nothing to back up his claim when you look at the area as a whole, or he's applying code that isn't applicable, but he's still doing it. An inspector told me that a neighboring county basically kicked him out because of this.

 

[Yikes]

The three codes do not mirror one another, but there is no conflict. Ignoring the practical impossibility of hitting 18" exactly, from a code perspective a toilet installed at 18" from the side wall would be in full compliance with all three codes/standards. That's not a conflict.

The tricky part in the toilet example is that if plumbing industry tolerances for toilet installation were +/- 1/4", then:

• Installing something to exactly 18" means you can aim for 18" but anything between 17.75 and 18.25 is acceptable.
• However, California expresses it as a range, so the CA upper limit is 18 with no tolerance for anything beyond that.
• That means the plumber has to hit between 17.75"-18", which means the real tolerance is +/- 1/8". That's tough to do especially if you are using wax seals that ought not to be wiggled once they are squished.