Can I force the landlord install a RAMP in front of the building (Brooklyn, NY)

[ICE]

Can I force the landlord install a RAMP in front of the building​

In reading the OPs' posts I see a pugnacious attitude. It started with the title.

An entity that has the wherewithal to own a seventy unit apartment building will not be easy to force to do anything.

Given that the mother has fallen twice pretty much wipes away any prospect of filing a lawsuit.

Threatening to involve the government is a cheap shot that might cost the mother a great deal.

The idea that one can rent an apartment and then force the landlord to modify the entrance is ridiculous. If you want a different entrance, rent a different apartment.

 

[classicT]

It's hard for me to believe that a forum dedicated to building codes does not understand at all where the ADA applies.

This is why I am adamant that I do not do ADA.

In WA, and in most AHJ outside of CA, TX, and few other states, the IBC will reference the ICC A117.1 standard. This is what AHJ should enforce. IBC Ch. 11 and A117.1 standard, as a safe haven document for the ADA, will typically meet or exceed the requirements from the ADA.

The discussion herein is a classic example. Per redeyedfly, the ADA may not apply to an apartment building. However, per IBC Section 1107.6.2.2, there are definitive requirements for accessible features to be provided in apartment buildings.

So, in conclusion, when speaking about accessibility, it is a fundamental need to understand which code is at play, and to call it by the proper reference. Not all accessibility requirements are "ADA". Some come from FHA or other federal standards. But in the end, unless your state directs enforcement of these federal standards, the AHJ should stick to the building codes adopted (i.e. typically the IBC and ICC A117.1 standard).

 

[redeyedfly]

This is why I am adamant that I do not do ADA.

In WA, and in most AHJ outside of CA, TX, and few other states, the IBC will reference the ICC A117.1 standard. This is what AHJ should enforce. IBC Ch. 11 and A117.1 standard, as a safe haven document for the ADA, will typically meet or exceed the requirements from the ADA.

The discussion herein is a classic example. Per redeyedfly, the ADA may not apply to an apartment building. However, per IBC Section 1107.6.2.2, there are definitive requirements for accessible features to be provided in apartment buildings.

So, in conclusion, when speaking about accessibility, it is a fundamental need to understand which code is at play, and to call it by the proper reference. Not all accessibility requirements are "ADA". Some come from FHA or other federal standards. But in the end, unless your state directs enforcement of these federal standards, the AHJ should stick to the building codes adopted (i.e. typically the IBC and ICC A117.1 standard).

Amen.

One caveat that the FHA is a national requirement. You must use the more restrictive of FHA or the local accessibility code in apartments nationwide. But the local AHJ is not the enforcement official, FHA is enforced by the DOJ.

 

[classicT]

Amen.

One caveat that the FHA is a national requirement. You must use the more restrictive of FHA or the local accessibility code in apartments nationwide. But the local AHJ is not the enforcement official, FHA is enforced by the DOJ.

Agreed. But I do believe the DOJ has endorsed the last several cycles of the IBC (and A117.1 by proxy) as a safe haven document for the FHA.

 

[steveray]

Here are the three most common misconceptions regarding accessibility in apartment housing settings.

There must be ADA apartment units​

The ADA applies only to public accommodations, such as hotel rooms, restaurants and convention centers. Therefore, the ADA applies to the public spaces of apartment communities (leasing offices, parking areas), but it does not cover the actual units.

Section 504 applies to all government-subsidized properties​

The design requirements of Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 went into effect for newly constructed Rural Development properties in 1982 and for HUD properties in 1988. Properties built before these dates do not have to have 5 percent of units fully accessible and 2 percent of units compliant for the hearing and visually impaired. If these older apartment communities are substantially rehabilitated, however, they are encouraged to meet those percentages.

In addition, common areas for these older properties do not need to be fully accessible; however, fair housing laws require owners to make reasonable modifications if requested by a resident.

Adaptable units that are not currently accessible are not in compliance with the FHAA​

The Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988 (FHAA) requires that buildings built after March 13, 1991, have seven specific design features that allow an owner to quickly adapt a unit if someone with a physical disability needs accessible features. For these buildings, all ground-floor units must be adaptable, all units in elevator buildings must be adaptable and all common areas must be completely accessible. If these units are adaptable—even if they are not currently accessible—then the property is in compliance with the FHAA.

 

[ADAguy]

ADA does not apply to a private apartment building. The building is only required to meet the code at the time it was built or a particular element modified; very unlikely to help you in this case. The Fair Housing act does apply and you can force the landlord to make a reasonable accommodation (a ramp to the entrance would certainly qualify) but your mother would have to pay for the ramp.

He knows of what he has written. File your complaint with local HUD office.

 

[Jean Tessmer-HI]

I am writing here as I know there are many experts here.

My mom is not wheel-chair bound, but she has a very hard time with her walker entering her building, which is a 6-story private apartment building located nearby to Maimonides Hospital, located in Boro Park, Brooklyn. There are approximately 70 apartments in the building and it is rent stabilized.

I am attaching three photos to show how "narrow" the current concrete platform is. Please go here to see them:

https://imageshack.com/a/1g4w7/1

The exact measurements are:

Concrete Platform (in front of the outside doors) is 80 inches long and only 19.8 inches wide. The standard walker is 24 inches long, meaning that there is not enough space for the walker to complete be flat on it. So she has to somehow to push the door far enough, and she does not have the strength to do it.

The doors are each 40 inches wide, but only the right side opens to the inside. Once inside, there is another same set of doors, of which the right side one needs to be opened with a security key. There is ample space to operate in front of the second (internal door), as there is about 5 feet between them.

There is NO ramp anywhere to enter the building.

After seeing the photos and reading the above, can someone please advise me if a either 1) a ramp extension can be built to help ease the situation OR 2) the current Concrete Platform has be extended to le say 30 inches (at least).

Any and all opinions are very much appreciated.

You can request a reasonable accommodation under the fair housing act. The landlord is required by law to comply with a reasonable accommodation request regardless of the status of the housing be it private, public housing, apartments, multifiamily, condominiums, townhouses, they are all covered by this DOJ and HUD. You may also have a HUD funded civil rights group in your county and you can file the complaint with them at no charge. I have worked on a number of these cases including a woman over 90 years old whole could no longer use the steps. If they deny you then they will end up paying for the ramp. Usually the cost is borne by the requestor. However, you are not required to remove and restore a publicly used accommodation built outside.

The Department of Justice (“DOJ”) and the Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”) are jointly responsible for enforcing the federal Fair Housing Act1 (the “Act”), which prohibits discrimination in housing on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, familial status, and disability.2 One type of disability discrimination prohibited by the Act is a refusal to permit, at the expense of the person with a disability, reasonable modifications of existing premises occupied or to be occupied by such person if such modifications may be necessary to afford such person full enjoyment of the premises.3 HUD and DOJ frequently respond to complaints alleging that housing providers have violated the Act by refusing reasonable modifications to persons with disabilities. This Statement provides technical assistance regarding the rights and obligations of persons with disabilities and housing providers under the Act relating to reasonable modifications. Here is the link - https://www.hud.gov/sites/documents/huddojstatement.pdf

 

[No Soup for you]

I do not recall seeing anywhere that the original poster was "willing to pay" for any accommodations.

Looks to me like the OP is looking for the owner to foot the bill.

If your mom is having that hard of a time and it is that much of a concern to the OP then (if it were me) mom would be moving in w/me or getting a new place.

The landlord has no "legal" obligation here that I see.

 

[Jean Tessmer-HI]

He did not say he was willing to pay and by the request I don't know either way. Wanted to make sure he realized he would have to execute and pay for the accommodation. Adding too that, the landlord is required by law to allow the requested accommodation.

 

[Jean Tessmer-HI]

It's hard for me to believe that a forum dedicated to building codes does not understand at all where the ADA applies.

Thank you.