syarn
Silver Member
84 unit HUD (financed) affordable apartment building.
UFAS section 4.1.3 (11) (b) requires 5% of the units to be accessible.
we have provided 5 accessible sinks with kitchen sinks that have shallow bowl depths to comply in 5 of the tenant apartments spaced through out the 3 floors.
however there is one apartment that is designated the "caretaker" and has an additional bedroom compared to all the other units. a person in this apartment is an employee for the company operating the apartments and has to be on call 24/7 to serve the people (tenants) in the building on behalf of the owner.
the kitchen sink in this apartment is 10" deep and therefore is not accessible (not to mention the shower & toilet); however the unit is "adaptable".
is this okay or is this a violation of the ADA from an operations standpoint (e.g. if the caretaker is disabled)?
would think the "adaptability" is acceptable and would allow the owner to go back and make the unit "accessible" if a disabled caretaker was hired.
UFAS section 4.1.3 (11) (b) requires 5% of the units to be accessible.
we have provided 5 accessible sinks with kitchen sinks that have shallow bowl depths to comply in 5 of the tenant apartments spaced through out the 3 floors.
however there is one apartment that is designated the "caretaker" and has an additional bedroom compared to all the other units. a person in this apartment is an employee for the company operating the apartments and has to be on call 24/7 to serve the people (tenants) in the building on behalf of the owner.
the kitchen sink in this apartment is 10" deep and therefore is not accessible (not to mention the shower & toilet); however the unit is "adaptable".
is this okay or is this a violation of the ADA from an operations standpoint (e.g. if the caretaker is disabled)?
would think the "adaptability" is acceptable and would allow the owner to go back and make the unit "accessible" if a disabled caretaker was hired.
