Accessibility

For years people have constructed buildings a certain way. Sure, the design varies greatly, but often they all had one thing in common; they were physically inaccessible for people with disabilities. We're talking about steps to get in, narrow hallways and doors impassable for wheelchairs, poor design for people with sensory disabilities, etc.

Then in the late 1980's and the early 1990's, something happened.

The Fair Housing Act (FHA) was amended to include people with disabilities, with accessibility requirements for people with physical disabilities and for people with sensory disabilities. This covered multi-family housing designed and occupied after March 13, 1991.

And the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) was signed into law by President George H.W. Bush on July 1990. It included accessibility requirements for public and commercial spaces.

So it has been two decades under those laws. How are we doing with those laws? If this study, "Access Denied" from New Orleans is any indication, not so well.

One hundred (100%) percent of the complexes examined failed to comply with at least one of the seven Design and Construction requirements. Eighty-one (81%)percent of the complexes tested failed to comply with two or more of the requirements. On average, the complexes examined failed to comply with three of the seven Design and Construction requirements. Failures to comply were broken down in the following manner:

* 16% of complexes had units that lacked accessible entrances.
* 58% of complexes lacked accessible public and/or common use areas.
* 32% of complexes had units with doorways that were not accessible.
* 42% of complexes had units that lacked accessible routes and/or passageways within the units.
* 63% of complexes had units that lacked accessible electrical and environmental controls.
* 32% of complexes reported that units may lack reinforcements of bathroom walls for grab bars.
* 89% of complexes had units with inaccessible bathrooms or kitchens.

An issue is that many architects are not familiar with the requirements of Fair Housing and ADA, and building inspectors lack the training to check newly constructed housing for accessibility. There is no proactive enforcement of the two laws, and the only way for enforcement is through complaints and lawsuits. While I would hope Wisconsin would do better than that, many people looking for housing have complained to me about landlords claiming that their buildings were accessible, the term "accessible" apparently expanded to include "only one or two steps."

The Report set forth seven recommendations which I'll be paraphasing here:

1. State building code should be reviewed & revised to comply with FHA requirements.
2. Tax-credit grantees should receive mandatory training.
3. The state architects association should also have mandatory training for its members.
4. Every building permit issued should have a brochure on accessibility requirements.
5. Multi-family housing built prior to 1991 should be able to receive funding for accessibility modifications.
6. People with disabilities and advocates should be trained to identify violations.
7. Lenders should require assurance of accessibility compliance as part of their lending process.

Those are not bad ideas at all. And this court decision should be a wake-up call for builders to not be so complacent about accessibility. The builder was sued for violating the law, and the builder tried to recoup the costs from the architect. The decision said that the builder is ultimately responsible for non-compliance.

Update: End of first paragraph somehow got deleted; fixed.