• Welcome to The Building Code Forum

    Your premier resource for building code knowledge.

    This forum remains free to the public thanks to the generous support of our Sawhorse Members and Corporate Sponsors. Their contributions help keep this community thriving and accessible.

    Want enhanced access to expert discussions and exclusive features? Learn more about the benefits here.

    Ready to upgrade? Log in and upgrade now.

Pair sues for more disabled access

mtlogcabin said:
Try and get a business loan today
Click to expand...
ADA has been in effect for 20 years.

A $60,000 mortgage on a decent piece of commercial real estate should not be that hard to obtain.
 
tbz said:
It's seems obvious that you are unaware of how hard it is for small family businesses that have existed for generations to even get loans for projects like this when their annual net is less than 10% of the cost.
Click to expand...
If their net is less than $6000 a year, then they don't have much to complain about in regards to losing their business.

They would make more as a greeter at Walmart.

BTW, lousy business decisions is not an excuse for non-compliance.
 
BTW, lousy business decisions is not an excuse for non-compliance.
Click to expand...
What is so lousy with having a business for 50 years, paying all your bills and owning a property handed down through the family prior to WW2 that you paid the govement more taxes on than you could ever sell it for and then have that same entity turn around and tell you by the way you have to change everything. Not making excessive amounts of money is not a lousey business decision, it was a simple living, that was well within his means till the goverment said you now have to do this.

The man did what he loved for a living and never hurt a sole, but stick it to the little guy for trying to live a simple life.

The only thing lousy I guess is that he had no greed or belief in that he was entitled to more than a basic life.
 
OK... so 3 ADA spaces are required/provided in a parking lot.. and legitimately disabled persons are parked there.. what does the 4th person (also legitimately disabled) park?

We can't accommodate everyone all the time.. that's just the way it is.
 
tbz said:
What is so lousy with having a business for 50 years, paying all your bills and owning a property handed down through the family prior to WW2 that you paid the govement more taxes on than you could ever sell it for and then have that same entity turn around and tell you by the way you have to change everything. Not making excessive amounts of money is not a lousey business decision, it was a simple living, that was well within his means till the goverment said you now have to do this.The man did what he loved for a living and never hurt a sole, but stick it to the little guy for trying to live a simple life.

The only thing lousy I guess is that he had no greed or belief in that he was entitled to more than a basic life.
Click to expand...
Just imagine all that hard work they put into inheriting property.

To have everything you were given at birth just disappear after twenty years without a business plan.

You really gotta' feel for those people.
 
The ADA laws are some of worst legislation to ever come out of congress; they're a giant money making machine for lawyers and have ruined many a small business unjustly.
 
Rio said:
The ADA laws are some of worst legislation to ever come out of congress; they're a giant money making machine for lawyers and have ruined many a small business unjustly.
Click to expand...
And just as the "green" BS will ultimately get shouted down when people come to their senses, the voice of reason will ultimately prevail regarding the ridiculous handicapped requirements, and some common sense will take over.
 
brudgers said:
Just imagine all that hard work they put into inheriting property.To have everything you were given at birth just disappear after twenty years without a business plan.

You really gotta' feel for those people.
Click to expand...
It's neither your concern nor mine how they got it, how hard they worked for it, or whether or not they had a business plan. It was theirs.
 
texasbo said:
It's neither your concern nor mine how they got it, how hard they worked for it, or whether or not they had a business plan. It was theirs.
Click to expand...
Their ownership interest in the real-estate is part and parcel of the same legal system as ADA. The property is no more or less theirs than the responsibility to comply with ADA is theirs.
 
So the right to property ownership is subject to the whimsical interpretations of the Department of Justice? I say it's not.

ADA is a great employment program for architects, but as it becomes more and more oppressive to the general public, they will stop it. The needs of a very, very few will not forever outweigh the rights of everyone else. Especially when those perceived needs are carried, or interpreted, to preposterous extremes.

And "just wait until you're in a wheelchair" is a most ridiculous argument.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
brudgers said:
Their ownership interest in the real-estate is part and parcel of the same legal system as ADA. The property is no more or less theirs than the responsibility to comply with ADA is theirs.
Click to expand...
I guess when money is all that matters in peoples minds you just don't get that people want a simple life not ruled at every turn with massive amounts of costs.

To turn it back on point the simple fact is that no one should be able to file suit againts another person or business for not having access. Its a simple truth, the government made the law and the government should be the only one that can enforce and file suit!

The local building department can't enforce ADA requirements unless the state or local AHJ adopted a piggy backed copy of the federal standard for them to use on their own.

So no single person or group should be able to file the suit for finacial gain.

The fines and penalties should come from the government cash cow and they should work with the entity to get them to comply. Each instance should be looked at realistically, not microscopictly and a model that has seemed to work is OSHA, they seem to have everyones interests at heart not just the banks.

Thats the simple point, the reality is that if you are lucky 1% of the suits you are seeing and reading about are about access and 99% is about pockets being filled.

So I see it as nothing more than personal greed hiding behind good intentions.
 
conarb said:
The Stanford Magazine had an article on beauty bias, demanding equality for ugly people, in response someone quoted Alexis de Tocqueville.
Click to expand...
Conrad, 10 thumbs up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
texasbo said:
So the right to property ownership is subject to the whimsical interpretations of the Department of Justice? I say it's not.
Click to expand...
The ownership interest in property is established by the same legal system that gives us the ADA and the DOJ.

It is no more or less a right than the right to accessibility.

You've put Robocop on a Unicorn: an individual's private property ownership often outweigh the rights of everyone else.
 
Maybe well-meaning AHJs should waive permit fees for ADA work? On the same day in 2003 I picked up two permits, both for $42,000, one for a window replacement on a residence at $693, the other for the ADA compliance on a church, on the church I spent $1,550 for an architect and $1,060 for the permit, I asked the permit tech why the church was more than the residence since both were $42,000, he said that they charged more for commercial than residential, and ADA work on a church was commercial. Why should government agencies, architects, and yes us contractors profiteer on ADA work?
 
conarb said:
Maybe well-meaning AHJs should waive permit fees for ADA work? On the same day in 2003 I picked up two permits, both for $42,000, one for a window replacement on a residence at $693, the other for the ADA compliance on a church, on the church I spent $1,550 for an architect and $1,060 for the permit, I asked the permit tech why the church was more than the residence since both were $42,000, he said that they charged more for commercial than residential, and ADA work on a church was commercial. Why should government agencies, architects, and yes us contractors profiteer on ADA work?
Click to expand...
This is the problem with anecdotal evidence.

People often don't know WTF they are talking about.

Churches are exempt from ADA.

Congratulations, you are now Fox News.
 
Brudgers said:
Churches are exempt from ADA.
Click to expand...
Well why the Hell did the County charge me? 2003 was 7 years ago so the statute has expired, I would have sued the SOBs had I known.

So what you are saying is that they are exempt from compliance but if they voluntarily comply they get charged exorbitant fees?
 
conarb said:
Well why the Hell did the County charge me? 2003 was 7 years ago so the statute has expired, I would have sued the SOBs had I known.So what you are saying is that they are exempt from compliance but if they voluntarily comply they get charged exorbitant fees?
Click to expand...
Places of worship are exempt from the ADA rules, But they are NOT exempt from California Accessibility Laws, rules and codes. The So called SOB's are doing their job.

Sound like the church is more inclusive than some on this board.
 
Mark said:
Sound like the church is more inclusive than some on this board.
Click to expand...
Your comments on inclusionism smack of egalitarianism.

Capitalism Magazine said:
Egalitarianism, which claims only to want an "equality" in end results, hates the exceptional man who, through his own mental effort, achieves that which others cannot. Trends in modern education reflect this egalitarian hatred of achievement. In an attempt to "dumb down" all students to the lowest common denominator, today's educators no longer promote excellence and students of superior ability. Rather, they focus on the slow and the diseased, crippling the most talented in the process.That some people are exceptional -- that some have more intelligence, are more beautiful or work harder than others -- is a threat to egalitarians. Talent and ability create inequality. To rectify this supposed injustice, we are told to sacrifice the able to the unable. Egalitarianism demands the punishment and envy of anyone who is better than someone else at anything. We must tear down the competent and the strong -- raze them to the level of the incompetent and the weak. We must worship a zero and sneer at a creator.¹
Click to expand...
Codes, Statutes, and Laws have no business promoting political and social agenda.

¹ http://www.capitalismmagazine.com/culture/diversity/3417-egalitarianism-the-new-torture-rack.html
 
I read a letter to the editor in our local paper the other day espousing egalitarianism.

Contra Costa Times said:
Sport? The language of sport: win, lose, defeat, conquer, thrash, hurt, beat, victory, fastest ... all the words and phrases of cruel experiences on the fields, in the pools, on the courts. What a shame. Where's the fun, the pleasure?



Those aren't fun for the winners or the losers. Those are about trying for achievement that will stand a person in good stead and leave others behind.

I played baseball, football and the usual children's games -- tag, races, marbles. We all wanted to win, for us and for our team!

I grew up not only in a different time, but in a different place as well. My folks, who were communists, were nice and also told me to be nice. That is the attitude that prevailed in our alley and when we went to the empty lots and parks to play. Play. Not beat. Not overcome others.

Short, small children, a handicapped child, one female among males -- we all felt supported by one another, not victimized. We didn't leave the game crying. We had several years of fun, no "organized" games, no folks' oversight, except what we all brought from home: Be nice.

Norma J.F. Harrison

Berkeley¹
Click to expand...
From Berkeley, and Big Game Week no less

¹ http://www.contracostatimes.com/letters/ci_16599126
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top