A Balancing Act: ADA Requirements - Too Much or Not Enough?

[jar546]

Has the ADA gone too far in its requirements, causing unnecessary cost and complexity, or is it still not doing enough to ensure full accessibility for all?

 

[bill1952]

Yes.

 

[Sifu]

Too much in some areas.

 

[Yikes]

Let’s provide some specific examples of unintended consequences. I’ll start:

1. USDOJ has determined ADA “replacement of cabinetry” as triggering a “substantial alteration” in public housing, requiring a full path of travel throughout 5% of multifamily units. Here in California, there’s a big move to try and get The homeless into old hotels/motels and postwar apartments. But many of these were built with CMU walls, compact restroom, 30” wide doors, and multistory units that are too expensive to make accessible, so they sit unused, or in the case of existing public housing, the cabinets can’t be replaced even if they are falling apart.

 

[e hilton]

It’s a well intentioned act, but devoid of common sense, and people are in fear of frivilous lawsuits.

 

[Paul Sweet]

The biggest problem with ADA is that it was written as an extension of the 1964 Civil Rights Act and is enforced by people filing lawsuits. In many cases it takes a one size fits all approach. It would have been better to require jurisdictions to adopt ANSI A117.1 or an equivalent standard. This would allow alternative ways of improving accessibility in existing buildings where full compliance would require major demolition and reconstruction.

 

[ICE]

Chapters 11A & 11B are already 215 pages. Perhaps some bureaucrat can come up with another couple pages but it's difficult to see what was left out.

 

[Yikes]

Example #2.
ADAS 233.3.5 requires that at public housing, the mobility accessible units be distributed among the various types and amenities available to other residents. It sounds reasonable, right? Now picture a housing complex that has 100% bathtubs with shower heads. A resident has limited mobility to lift their legs, bend over, etc. They would prefer a walk-in shower (so they don't have to lift their legs over the tub rim).

Sorry, no can do: If I give everyone else a bathub/shower combo, but only give the mobility unit a shower, I have violated the equivalent amenities requirement in ADA 233.5, and I have discriminated against other future tenants of the mobility unit by not offering them the opportunity to take a bath.

So in this situation, in order to comply with ADA I have to make the unit less usable that a real-world person with disabilities would like.

 

[Msradell]

Speaking as someone who is disabled I see the biggest problem with the ADA is that most parts of the country do not have any means or desire in enforcing the law as written. This means that those with disabilities have no means of pursuing equal access except through lawsuits. Even when a lawsuit is considered there are very few lawyers who pursue such a case so in reality the ADA isn't enforced in any way. It's more a matter of not pursuing what's already written, not writing or amending regulations that are part of it already.

 

[jar546]

Speaking as someone who is disabled I see the biggest problem with the ADA is that most parts of the country do not have any means or desire in enforcing the law as written. This means that those with disabilities have no means of pursuing equal access except through lawsuits. Even when a lawsuit is considered there are very few lawyers who pursue such a case so in reality the ADA isn't enforced in any way. It's more a matter of not pursuing what's already written, not writing or amending regulations that are part of it already.

The ADA was supposed to be a game-changer, but it's like the rules are there, and many places just shrug them off. It's baffling and honestly pretty unfair that people have to consider going to court to get basic accessibility or rights. And finding a lawyer who's willing to tackle an ADA case? It's like finding a needle in a haystack. We shouldn't be talking about adding more rules. We should be making sure the current ones actually work for everyone like they're supposed to.

 

[bill1952]

The ADA was supposed to be a game-changer, but it's like the rules are there, and many places just shrug them off.

Agree but one of the difficulties is that many of the "rules" were written from a users perspective, and not from a designer's or builder's perspective. Absolute dimensions instead of min and max is just one example. Using terms and labels different than the industry is another. That's slowly changing.

Congress and the federal bureaucracy is much better at making rules and claiming the problem is solved than they are at the follow through of education and enforcement to actually solve the problem.

The differences in urban versus rural compliance shouldn't be surprising. People in rural areas are simply more independent and less quick to accept regulation from outside, and less quick to change their practices. It's like 24-28" restroom doors seem standard around here.

I am though amazed when I see a new building in an urban setting by a major architectural firm that seems to be clueless to designing an accessible building.

 

[Yikes]

Major architectural firms are, for the most part, made up of smaller teams that function like small offices within the larger firm. Expertise is difficult to transmit through the firm culture, especially among younger staff who know how to copy+paste in CAD / BIM from other projects without gaining the knowledge of how to use the code.

Worse, on smaller projects, I’ve seen an Owner hire a big-name architectural firm because that marketing staff sells them on the “A team”, but then the project gets handed off to the “C team” of summer interns.

 

[steveray]

We should be making sure the current ones actually work for everyone like they're supposed to.

AMEN...REMAS for POTUS