Yard House agrees to improve disabled access

[mark handler]

http://www.bizjournals.com/denver/morning_call/2011/12/yard-house-agrees-to-improve-disabled.html

Denver Business Journal

Date: Friday, December 30, 2011, 7:00am MST

The Yard House restaurant on the 16th Street Mall in downtown Denver will build a ramp at the front entrance of the restaurant as part of a settlement agreement with the Colorado Cross-Disability Coalition (CCDC).

The coalition, and plaintiffs Julie Reiskin and Jaime Lewis, had filed a lawsuit in federal district court alleging that the Yard House violated the Americans with Disabilities Act by building a one-step entrance when it remodeled the restaurant.

“I couldn’t believe it when I rolled down the 16th Street Mall and found a new restaurant with a step at the front entrance,” Lewis, who works as CCDC’s community liaison, said in a news release. “CCDC has been enforcing the ADA for 20 years. I knew something was wrong. More importantly, it looked like a great place to have lunch, but where was the entrance?”

In addition, the only way to access the Yard House patio from inside the restaurant is by one step.

As part of the settlement, the Yard House will implement policies and procedures to ensure that people who use wheelchairs have access to the patio dining area.

“It’s unfortunate that businesses who build barriers to access must spend money making them accessible when there is no cost to building it right in the first place,” Reiskin, CCDC executive director and plaintiff, said in the release.

 

[Msradell]

So I guess at Colorado building inspections for new construction don't bother verifying compliance with ADA requirements nor do they verify that drawings submitted for permits meet the requirements?

 

[mark handler]

Many building inspections, like some on this board, do not feel they are responsible for access compliance.

 

[mark handler]

Many businesses that lease space feel it is the property owner’s responsibility . They are wrong.

Many businesses and some building departments feel that a TI only requires the 20 percent rule.

This is showing you can’t hide behind the 20 percent rule.

Compliant restrooms are useless if you cannot get in.

CA Code requires the twenty percent spent in the following order:

1.1. An accessible entrance;

1.2. An accessible route to the altered area;

1.3. At least one accessible restroom for each sex;

1.4. Accessible telephones;

1.5. Accessible drinking fountains; and

1.6. When possible, additional accessible elements such as parking, storage and alarms.

 

[High Desert]

Oregon is similar to California, but we up it to 25% by state statute. We go in this order.

(a) Parking;

(b) An accessible entrance;

© An accessible route to the altered

area;

(d) At least one accessible rest room for

each sex or a single unisex rest room;

(e) Accessible telephones;

(f) Accessible drinking fountains; and

(g) When possible, additional accessible

elements such as storage and alarms.

 

[Msradell]

Many businesses that lease space feel it is the property owner’s responsibility . They are wrong.Many businesses and some building departments feel that a TI only requires the 20 percent rule.

This is showing you can’t hide behind the 20 percent rule.

Compliant restrooms are useless if you cannot get in.

CA Code requires the twenty percent spent in the following order:

1.1. An accessible entrance;

1.2. An accessible route to the altered area;

1.3. At least one accessible restroom for each sex;

1.4. Accessible telephones;

1.5. Accessible drinking fountains; and

1.6. When possible, additional accessible elements such as parking, storage and alarms.

It would certainly be nice if something along this line was part of the Federal legislation! Speaking from the point of being handicapped I can't even begin to express the frustration of being unable to enter a business where I want to go. Especially frustrating for restaurants since in many cases there's not a direct comparison so going to another business is not possible.

I really have a hard time understanding how local officials don't think it's part of their responsibility to enforce ADA requirements! It should start with when plans are reviewed and continue through the inspection process.

 

[mark handler]

It is really not apart of their responsibility to enforce ADA, unless empowered by state or local statute.It is their responsibility to enforce state and local Accessibility codes.