• Welcome to the new and improved Building Code Forum. We appreciate you being here and hope that you are getting the information that you need concerning all codes of the building trades. This is a free forum to the public due to the generosity of the Sawhorses, Corporate Supporters and Supporters who have upgraded their accounts. If you would like to have improved access to the forum please upgrade to Sawhorse by first logging in then clicking here: Upgrades

ADA class action filed in Pittsburgh federal court

ICE said:
The only way to get to twenty percent is to include fat people and redheads. That's two strikes fatboy. Give it a few years and it will be 100%
Click to expand...
The 20% is not chair users, 2.6 percent are chair/scooter users

The rest have other impairments

Facts
 
Where are you getting those numbers? Couple some opinions with the numbers. Break down the numbers. Tell us how many of the wheelchair users go anywhere in the wheelchair. Be transparent.

You tell me that my facts about blind people are only one mans opinion. Therefor those facts about blind people do not count in the discussion. The ADA justification is based solely on numbers. The ADA lobby will not tolerate a dissection of the numbers to form opinions. Only the numbers count and only the numbers are accepted as fact. What BS. The decision to endorse ADA is based on an opinion of the facts. We decide everything in life based on opinions. Sometimes we have the facts and sometimes we don't but we always have an opinion.

I don't know what to trust for ADA facts. I do know what I experience and I am entitled to form an opinion based on the facts that I have at hand. Your 2.6% of wheelchair users may or may not be accurate.....but here's an indisputable fact about that 2.6% .....it's a small number....it doesn't warrant a trillion dollars worth of ugly construction.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
ICE said:
Where are you getting those numbers? ....it doesn't warrant a trillion dollars worth of ugly construction.
Click to expand...
You can strat with these

UC San Francisco

http://dsc.ucsf.edu/publication.php?pub_id=2&section_id=4

Cornell University.

http://www.disabilitystatistics.org/

http://www.disabilitystatistics.org/reports/cps.cfm?statistic=prevalence

U.S. Department of Labor

http://www.dol.gov/odep/pubs/fact/data.htm

a trillion dollars, where did that come from, thought we were talking facts
 
Going back to the OP, I believe that a 5% slope was allowable before ADAAG reduced it to 2%.

Correcting the grade for accessible parking spaces in an existing parking lot isn't always "readily achievable". If the tenant doesn't own the parking lot, he can't force the landlord to regrade and restripe the parking lot.

We had to add 2 accessible parking spaces to a community college parking lot with a 5% slope a couple years ago. It took 4 spaces to do this (1/2 space each side for transition, the 2 accessible spaces, and a van aisle between). This was in a parking lot of several hundred spaces, so nobody notices the 2 lost spaces. It would be different in a small lot with only a couple dozen spaces.
 
The OP was about "several" locations. If they are not "readily achievable", or if they complied with the original ADAAG, the case will be dismissed.
 
mark handler said:
The OP was about "several" locations. If they are not "readily achievable", or if they complied with the original ADAAG, the case will be dismissed.
Click to expand...
Mark:

So you believe in shotgun suing people just to see what sticks? It can cost 10s of thousands of dollars in legal fees just to defend against a claim and get it dismissed. In the instant case if the plaintiff gets certified as a class action it will cost 100s of thousands of dollars, much of it just to try to defeat the certification.

People who I know who are really handicapped want nothing to do with this because of the backlash.

Why are you so obsessed about ADA?
 
mark handler said:
And why are you?
Click to expand...
Because it reeks of egalitarianism and redistribution of wealth.

Bad laws should not be enforced, did you see that New Jersey has banned enforcement of red light traffic tickets from other states to protect it's citizens from extortion:

AOL said:
Speed and red-light cameras are supposed to make driving safer by changing driving behavior over time, but increasingly, critics say the safety benefits are dubious and the cameras are nothing more than revenue generators for states and municipalities. Rather than improve traffic safety, a 2008 study conducted by University of South Florida researchers found they "significantly" increase crashes.¹
Click to expand...
We all know that red light traffic enforcement is nothing but municipal blackmail to line the pockets of corrupt cities, maybe some states should look at banning ADA enforcement within it's borders, Federal law always superceeded statute until the present administration has elected not to enforce Federal law if it conflicted with state law.

¹ http://autos.aol.com/article/new-jersey-shields-drivers-other-states-red-light-speed-cameras/?icid=maing-grid7%7Chtmlws-sb-bb%7Cdl7%7Csec1_lnk3%26pLid%3D513404
 
Many Pittsburgh area Bob Evans locations are likely pre ADA or the old 5% standard. Regrading of parking spaces in this hilly area is at least debatable if it is "readily achieveable" without creating other hazards, not to mention costly. You have to tie into existing street and building floor grades, many of which would have been designed at maximum grades in the design standards of the time.
 
Frank said:
Many Pittsburgh area Bob Evans locations are likely pre ADA or the old 5% standard. Regrading of parking spaces in this hilly area is at least debatable if it is "readily achieveable" without creating other hazards, not to mention costly. You have to tie into existing street and building floor grades, many of which would have been designed at maximum grades in the design standards of the time.
Click to expand...
The questions then become;

Did they remodel? When? extent?

and

Have the repaved the parking lot since 1994?
 
Yesterday I had lunch at a hot dog place, one of a chain I have mentioned before, a new CASp sign has appeared on a wall indicating that it has met all requirements, but still no restrooms available to the public. Are they given time to comply and allowed to display the sign in the meantime?

I've done this work before, I'd roughly estimate that adding one unisex restroom will cost something just over $100,000 and they may loose seating (if they asked me I'd bring in my architect who is knowledgeable about ADA and work with him and the owner to see if it is at all possible to expand the employees' restroom in their back kitchen/store room, but they will loose something important there too even if it is possible). They are located in a small strip mall and Handicap Parking is not near the doors, and is certainly inadequate with no van spaces. BTW, they do have many disabled customers on a daily basis, probably because they are near a large retirement community, to my knowledge nobody has complained or sued. To tear out and jackhammer out floors they will have to shut down for a couple of weeks, on the other hand I've remodeled restaurants where they wanted to stay open and I've worked at night paying time and a half, it does cost a lot more but may restaurants have thought the extra cost was worth it not to shut down (I've priced it both ways). The center owner is a large real estate development company with many complexes, there are several other restaurants in this strip mall sharing the limited parking, I think their biggest financial hit will/would be the loss of parking to all businesses in the center.
 
mark handler said:
The questions then become; Did they remodel? When? extent?

and

Have the repaved the parking lot since 1994?
Click to expand...
Correcting parking grades may not be feasible even if repaving, alot of that area is pretty hilly. If you flatten out the parking space to the 2% from 5% you have raised the far corner of a 2 spaces and aisle pair as much as 11 inches, tapering this back out to existing grades while chasing down hill can create high centering, approach, and breakover angle issues. I can have a flat parking space, but what good does it do if I cannot get into it because the car bottoms out on the vehicular approach? Fixing the accessible space may create violations of vehicular way design standards the make the vehicular route unusable by some vehicles either by tearing off spoilers or by high centering damaging the undercarriage. It can also create excessive vehicular way crossslopes creating an issue in bad weather. Not everyone drives a truck or SUV all the time.
 
Frank said:
Correcting parking grades may not be feasible even if repaving, alot of that area is pretty hilly. If you flatten out the parking space to the 2% from 5% you have raised the far corner of a 2 spaces and aisle pair as much as 11 inches, tapering this back out to existing grades while chasing down hill can create high centering, approach, and breakover angle issues. I can have a flat parking space, but what good does it do if I cannot get into it because the car bottoms out on the vehicular approach? Fixing the accessible space may create violations of vehicular way design standards the make the vehicular route unusable by some vehicles either by tearing off spoilers or by high centering damaging the undercarriage. It can also create excessive vehicular way crossslopes creating an issue in bad weather. Not everyone drives a truck or SUV all the time.
Click to expand...
That will be for the judge to decide
 
conarb said:
Yesterday I had lunch at a hot dog place, one of a chain I have mentioned before, a new CASp sign has appeared on a wall indicating that it has met all requirements, but still no restrooms available to the public. Are they given time to comply and allowed to display the sign in the meantime? I've done this work before, I'd roughly estimate that adding one unisex restroom will cost something just over $100,000 and they may loose seating (if they asked me I'd bring in my architect who is knowledgeable about ADA and work with him and the owner to see if it is at all possible to expand the employees' restroom in their back kitchen/store room, but they will loose something important there too even if it is possible). They are located in a small strip mall and Handicap Parking is not near the doors, and is certainly inadequate with no van spaces. BTW, they do have many disabled customers on a daily basis, probably because they are near a large retirement community, to my knowledge nobody has complained or sued. To tear out and jackhammer out floors they will have to shut down for a couple of weeks, on the other hand I've remodeled restaurants where they wanted to stay open and I've worked at night paying time and a half, it does cost a lot more but may restaurants have thought the extra cost was worth it not to shut down (I've priced it both ways). The center owner is a large real estate development company with many complexes, there are several other restaurants in this strip mall sharing the limited parking, I think their biggest financial hit will/would be the loss of parking to all businesses in the center.
Click to expand...
CASp signs do not indicate that it has met all requirements, The certificate says the premises was inspected.

Based on the inspection, A report is written, and it is up to the Owner to correct the deficiencies.
 
mark handler said:
CASp signs do not indicate that it has met all requirements, The certificate says the premises was inspected.Based on the inspection, A report is written, and it is up to the Owner to correct the deficiencies.
Click to expand...
Kinda like a Florida's Natural Label meaning it is not Natural or from Florida....

 
mark handler said:
WOW Dick I think that is a little high
Click to expand...
Architects and building inspectors have never understood costs, building inspectors is understandable because we always take out our permits for a fraction of actual costs for two reasons, 1) keep our fees down, and 2) keep the owners' property taxes down. It's frustration with architect, their owners always want more than they can afford, or are willing to pay, and when bids/or prices come in the poor architects are always engaging in value engineering, in many times seriously compromising their designs. The last ADA I did was remodeling two baths to ADA standards 11 years ago, it ran about $70,000 (building permit over $3,000), removing old VAB flooring brings in the abatement contractors in space suits, covered walkways to covered trucks, and apparently taking the stuff by train to a huge canyon in Arizona (the last I heard). Now we have lead paint and Green Code recycling requirements as well.

BTW, contractors' liability does not cover design professionals, when it comes to ADA the architect has to have his insurance company name the contractor and the owner on their policies as additionally insured, lots of architects' E&O policies are now refusing to do that, so we are limited to architects who have policies that will do that. If somebody does sue for an ADA violation my insurance will not countenance the lawsuit, I have to submit it directly to the architect's insurance carrier for defense . I did an ADA compliance a a large Catholic church once, several members were architects and contractors, none of them could provide the insurance for ADA compliance work, I was building a home near a committee member and he asked if I could do it? I submitted a proposal, their diocese attorneys, my insurance attorneys, and my attorney spent three weeks arguing over one word in the hold harmless and indemnification clause.

This is just the start of the paperwork, I then have to fill out multipage subcontract agreements with every subcontractor, before I allow any on the job I have to collect certificates of insurance from all of them naming me, the architect, and the owner as additionally insured.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Are they morally justified to "stone" adulterers? In California we allow them to hold office: Lt. Gov., former mayor. Are they any more moral than us?

Pull out of the middle east, let them drink oil! Use our technology to live without their oil. Imagine what that would do for the world's economy?

To many MBA's in this country and not enough mechanics. Must all of our products be built overseas?
 
conarb said:
Architects and building inspectors have never understood costs, building inspectors is understandable because we always take out our permits for a fraction of actual costs for two reasons, 1) keep our fees down, and 2) keep the owners' property taxes down. It's frustration with architect, their owners always want more than they can afford, or are willing to pay, and when bids/or prices come in the poor architects are always engaging in value engineering, in many times seriously compromising their designs. The last ADA I did was remodeling two baths to ADA standards 11 years ago, it ran about $70,000 (building permit over $3,000), removing old VAB flooring brings in the abatement contractors in space suits, covered walkways to covered trucks, and apparently taking the stuff by train to a huge canyon in Arizona (the last I heard). Now we have lead paint and Green Code recycling requirements as well.BTW, contractors' liability does not cover design professionals, when it comes to ADA the architect has to have his insurance company name the contractor and the owner on their policies as additionally insured, lots of architects' E&O policies are now refusing to do that, so we are limited to architects who have policies that will do that. If somebody does sue for an ADA violation my insurance will not countenance the lawsuit, I have to submit it directly to the architect's insurance carrier for defense . I did an ADA compliance a a large Catholic church once, several members were architects and contractors, none of them could provide the insurance for ADA compliance work, I was building a home near a committee member and he asked if I could do it? I submitted a proposal, their diocese attorneys, my insurance attorneys, and my attorney spent three weeks arguing over one word in the hold harmless and indemnification clause.

This is just the start of the paperwork, I then have to fill out multipage subcontract agreements with every subcontractor, before I allow any on the job I have to collect certificates of insurance from all of them naming me, the architect, and the owner as additionally insured.
Click to expand...
So you are saying you have been lying on legal documents for years.

BTW I carry two million in E and O insurance as an architect/BO
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top