Regulatory Assessment of the Final Revised Accessibility Guidelines for the Americans with Disabilities Act and Architectural Barriers Act

July 2004

This assessment has been developed and reviewed in accordance with the Access Board’s information quality guidelines (www.access-board.gov/infoquality.htm).

 

CONTENTS

• EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

• CHAPTER 1: BACKGROUND

• CHAPTER 2: METHODOLOGY

• CHAPTER 3: HARMONIZATION BENEFITS

• CHAPTER 4 ALTERNATIVES THAT ELIMINATE IMPACTS ESTIMATED FOR THE PROPOSED RULE

• CHAPTER 5 REVISIONS THAT REDUCE IMPACTS

• CHAPTER 6 REVISIONS THAT HAVE MINIMAL IMPACTS

• CHAPTER 7 REVISIONS THAT HAVE MONETARY IMPACTS

• CHAPTER 8:  NATIONAL COSTS FOR OFFICE BUILDINGS, HOTELS, HOSPITALS AND NURSING HOMES, AND GOVERMENT HOUSING

• CHAPTER 9 LEASED POSTAL FACILITIES

• CHAPTER 10 SMALL ENTITIES

---

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Access Board prepared this assessment of the final revised accessibility guidelines for the Americans with Disabilities Act and Architectural Barriers Act pursuant to Executive Order 12866.  The Americans with Disabilities Act requires newly constructed and altered State and local government facilities, places of public accommodation, and commercial facilities to be accessible to individuals with disabilities.  The Architectural Barriers Act requires federally financed facilities to be accessible, including facilities leased by Federal agencies. 

 

The Access Board is required to establish and maintain accessibility guidelines for facilities covered by the Americans with Disabilities Act and Architectural Barriers Act.  The guidelines serve as the basis for enforceable standards issued by other agencies under the Americans with Disabilities Act and Architectural Barriers Act.  The Access Board initially issued the Minimum Guidelines and Requirements for Accessible Design (MGRAD) for the Architectural Barriers Act in 1982, and the Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines (ADAAG) in 1991. 

 

Since the enactment of the Americans with Disabilities Act, accessibility requirements have been increasingly incorporated in the model codes.  The Access Board worked collaboratively with the International Code Council (ICC) and the ANSI A117 Committee to harmonize the final revised guidelines with the International Building Code, which was first published in 2000, and the ICC/ANSI A117.1 Standard on Accessible and Usable Buildings and Facilities, which is referenced in the International Building Code.  The International Building Code has been adopted statewide by 28 States and by local governments in another 15 States. 

 

Harmonizing the accessibility guidelines for the Americans with Disabilities Act and Architectural Barriers Act with the International Building Code and the ICC/ANSI A117.1 standard promotes increased compliance, efficiency, and economic growth.  It is difficult and time consuming for business owners, builders, developers, and architects to deal with different accessibility requirements at the Federal, State, and local government levels.  Differing requirements can contribute to mistakes resulting in litigation and costly retrofitting of facilities after they are constructed.  The Americans with Disabilities Act authorizes the Department of Justice to certify State or local codes that meet or exceed Federal accessibility requirements.  State and local governments that adopt the International Building Code will find it easier to have their codes certified, and more State and local governments are expected to submit their codes to the Department of Justice for certification.  In jurisdictions where codes have been certified by the Department of Justice, business owners, builders, developers, and architects can rely on their State or local government building plan approval and inspection processes as a “check-point” for ensuring that their facilities comply with Federal accessibility requirements.  Potential mistakes can be corrected early in the construction process when adjustments can be made easily and inexpensively compared to costly retrofitting after a facility is constructed.  Compliance with a certified code is also evidence of compliance with Federal accessibility requirements in litigation to enforce the Americans with Disabilities Act.

 

The Access Board also revised some requirements in the current guidelines for the Americans with Disabilities Act and Architectural Barriers Act to reduce the impacts on facilities, including lowering the number of wheelchair spaces and assistive listening systems required in large sports facilities; exempting small raised press boxes in sports facilities from the accessible route requirements; exempting parking lots with a few parking spaces from signage requirements for accessible parking spaces; and reducing the number of toilet rooms required to be accessible where multiple single user toilet rooms are clustered at the same location.

 

The regulatory assessment for the proposed rule estimated that the national costs of the rule would be $87.5 million annually for newly constructed office buildings, hotels, and sports stadiums and arenas.  The Board adopted alternatives in the final revised guidelines that eliminate these costs as shown in Table ES.1.

 

Table ES.1 – Alternatives That Eliminate Costs Estimated for the Proposed Rule (text version)

 

This assessment compares the final revised guidelines to the current guidelines and the International Building Code in order to evaluate the potential impacts of the revisions.  In the absence of the final revised guidelines, newly constructed and altered facilities covered by the Americans with Disabilities Act would have to comply with ADAAG as initially issued in 1991, which has been adopted as enforceable standards by the Department of Justice and Department of Transportation.  Many newly constructed and altered facilities covered by the Architectural Barriers Act are also required to comply with ADAAG when it provides a greater level of accessibility compared to the Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards (UFAS).  Comparing the final revised guidelines to the current guidelines is the upper bound of the range of potential impacts.  The International Building Code has been adopted statewide by 28 States and by local governments in another 15 States.  In the absence of the final revised guidelines, newly constructed and altered facilities are required to comply with the International Building Code in jurisdictions that have adopted the model code.  Comparing the final revised guidelines to the International Building Code is the lower bound of the range of potential impacts, and assumes that facilities covered by the Americans with Disabilities Act and Architectural Barriers Act are also required to comply with equivalent requirements in the International Building Code.  The actual impacts will be between the lower and upper bound of the range.

 

The final revised guidelines reorganize and renumber ADAAG, and rewrite the text to be clearer and easier to understand.  Most of the scoping and technical requirements in ADAAG have not been changed.  An independent codes expert compared the final revised guidelines and ADAAG to identify revisions that add new features or space to a facility, or present design challenges compared to ADAAG.  The codes expert identified 27 revisions that are expected to have minimal impacts on the new construction and alterations of facilities, including adding scoping requirements and exceptions for  common use circulation paths in employee work areas; revising scoping requirements for public entrances; referencing the International Building Code for accessible means of egress; adding scoping requirements for dwelling units with mobility features in Federal, State, and local government housing; lowering the high side reach; and adding technical requirements for automated teller machines and fare machines.

 

The codes expert also identified 14 revisions that are expected to have monetary impacts on the new construction and alterations of facilities.  An independent cost estimator prepared cost estimates for these revisions using standard industry procedures.  The revisions that are expected to have monetary impacts on the new construction and alterations of facilities are summarized in Table ES.2. 

 

Table ES.2 - Revisions with Monetary Impacts on

New Construction and Alterations (text version)

 

Office buildings, hotels, hospitals and nursing homes, and Federal, State, and local government housing will be affected by many of the revisions in Table ES.2, and are likely to experience relatively higher costs than other facilities.  The assessment estimates the national costs of the revisions for the construction of these facilities. The national costs are summarized in Table ES.3.   

 

Table ES.3 – National Costs for Facilities Likely

to Experience Relatively Higher Costs (text version)

 

The assessment also estimates the additional costs of the revisions for individual facilities as a percentage of total construction costs as shown in Table ES.4.

 

Table ES.4 – Additional Costs for Individual Facilities (text version)

 

The final revised guidelines will affect the new construction and alterations of other types of facilities.  Industry reports estimate $152 billion of non-residential building construction projects were started in 2002; and government reports estimate $264 billion of non-residential building construction work and $6 billion of Federal, State and local government housing construction work was installed in 2002.  In order to be considered an economically significant regulatory action with an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more, the final revised guidelines would need to have impacts ranging from 0.04 percent to 0.07 percent of industry and government construction estimates.  The final revised guidelines will have impacts within or above this range on office buildings and hotels, and it is likely that the impacts on some other facilities will be within or above this range.   Although the impacts are not significant for an individual facility, when added together across the economy the impacts can be economically significant.  Because an extremely low threshold of impacts on individual facilities can render the final revised guidelines economically significant, and because the benefits of the final revised guidelines are unquantifiable but substantial, the Board has classified the final revised guidelines as an economically significant regulatory action.

 

The final revised guidelines will also affect leased postal facilities. When the United States Postal Service enters into a new lease for a postal facility, including previously occupied space, it will have to comply with the accessibility requirements in the final revised guidelines for facilities leased by Federal agencies, including providing accessible customer service counters and van accessible parking spaces.  The United States Postal Service leases 27,000 postal facilities, and estimates that it will cost $9,234 per facility to comply with the final revised guidelines.  The United States Postal Service enters into an average of 1,661 new leases per year for postal facilities, and estimates it will cost $15.3 million annually for leased postal facilities to comply with the final revised guidelines.

 

On the basis of this assessment, the Access Board certifies that the final revised guidelines are not expected to have a significant economic impact on the new construction and alterations of facilities by a substantial number of small entities for purposes of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.  The final revised guidelines will add 0.01 to 0.5 percent to the total construction costs of facilities compared to the current guidelines; and 0.00 to 0.3 percent to the total construction costs of facilities compared to the International Building Code.  These impacts are not significant for an individual facility.

 

---

CHAPTER 1:  BACKGROUND

1.0  Introduction

 

Executive Order 12866 requires Federal agencies to submit certain regulatory actions to the Office of Management and Budget for review.  The agency must provide the Office of Management and Budget the text of the regulatory action, together with an assessment of the impacts of the regulatory action.  The assessment must describe the need for the regulatory action and how the regulatory action will meet that need.  The assessment must also explain how the regulatory action is consistent with statutory mandates, promotes the President’s priorities, and avoids undue interference with State, local, and tribal governments in the exercise of their governmental functions.   The Access Board prepared this assessment of the final revised accessibility guidelines for the Americans with Disabilities Act and Architectural Barriers Act to meet the requirements of Executive Order 12866.

1.1  Statutory Authority

 

The Access Board is required by statute to establish and maintain minimum guidelines to ensure that facilities covered by the Americans with Disabilities Act and Architectural Barriers Act are accessible, in terms of architecture and design and communication, to individuals with disabilities.[1]  These guidelines serve as the basis for enforceable standards issued by other agencies under the Americans with Disabilities Act and Architectural Barriers Act.  The requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act and Architectural Barriers Act with respect to facilities are explained below.

 

Americans with Disabilities Act

 

The Americans with Disabilities Act was enacted in 1990 based upon the Congress finding that:

 

“individuals with disabilities continually encounter various forms of discrimination, including . . . the discriminatory effects of architectural, transportation, and communication barriers.”[2] 

 

The purpose of the Americans with Disabilities Act is:

 

“to provide clear, strong, consistent, and enforceable standards addressing

discrimination against individuals with disabilities [and] to ensure that the

Federal government plays a central role in enforcing the standards.”[3] 

 

The Americans with Disabilities Act requires newly constructed State and local government facilities, places of public accommodation, and commercial facilities to be accessible to individuals with disabilities.[4]  The Americans with Disabilities Act also requires parts of existing facilities that are altered to be accessible.[5] 

 

Two agencies are responsible for issuing enforceable standards for facilities covered by the Americans with Disabilities Act. 

 

• The Department of Transportation issues enforceable standards for public transportation facilities owned or operated by State and local governments, and the National Railroad Passenger Corporation.[6] 

 

• The Department of Justice issues enforceable standards for all other types of facilities.[7]

 

Architectural Barriers Act

 

The Architectural Barriers Act was enacted in 1968 to provide individuals with disabilities access to facilities financed by the Federal government.  The Architectural Barriers Act covers facilities constructed, altered, or leased by the Federal government.[8]  The Architectural Barriers Act also covers facilities constructed or altered with a Federal grant or loan, where the law authorizing the grant or loan authorizes the administering agency to issue design or construction standards; and facilities constructed by the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority.[9] 

 

Four agencies are responsible for issuing enforceable standards for facilities covered by the Architectural Barriers Act. 

 

• The Department of Housing and Urban Development issues enforceable standards for federally financed residential facilities.[10] 

• The Department of Defense issues enforceable standards for military facilities.[11] 

• The United States Postal Service issues enforceable standards for postal facilities.[12]

• The General Services Administration issues enforceable standards for all other federally financed facilities.[13]

 

1.2  Current Guidelines and Standards

 

MGRAD and UFAS

 

In 1982, the Access Board issued the Minimum Guidelines and Requirements for Accessible Design (MGRAD) to assist the Department of Housing and Urban Development, Department of Defense, United States Postal Service, and General Services Administration in establishing a consistent set of enforceable standards.[14]  These four agencies in turn issued the Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards (UFAS) in 1984 as the enforceable standards for facilities covered by the Architectural Barriers Act.[15] 

 

ADAAG

 

In 1991, the Access Board issued the Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines (ADAAG) to assist the Department of Justice and Department of Transportation in establishing a consistent set of enforceable standards.[16]  ADAAG is modeled on UFAS.  ADAAG includes provisions for features and facilities that are not addressed in UFAS.  For example, ADAAG has provisions for van accessible parking spaces, public TTYs, automated teller machines, and transportation facilities.  UFAS does not address these features or facilities.  The Access Board prepared a regulatory assessment for ADAAG when the guidelines were initially issued.[17]  The Department of Justice and Department of Transportation adopted ADAAG in 1991 as the enforceable standards for facilities covered by the Americans with Disabilities Act.[18]  The General Services Administration requires Federal agencies to use ADAAG for facilities covered by the Architectural Barriers Act when it provides a greater level of access compared to UFAS.[19] 
 

Children’s Facilities Guidelines

 

In 1998, the Access Board amended ADAAG by adding guidelines for children’s facilities.[20]  These guidelines add child-sized alternatives to the existing adult dimensions that can be used when designing building elements for children.  The Access Board did not prepare a regulatory assessment for the children’s facilities guidelines because they do not establish any new requirements.  The children’s facilities guidelines have not been adopted by the Department of Justice or Department of Transportation. 

 

State and Local Government Facilities Guidelines

 

In 1998, the Access Board also amended ADAAG by adding guidelines for judicial facilities, and detention and correctional facilities.[21]  These guidelines address certain areas within court rooms such as raised judges’ benches, and within jails and prisons such as the number of cells required to provide mobility features.[22]  The Access Board did not prepare a regulatory assessment for the State and local government facilities guidelines because they do not impose any significant impacts on State and local government facilities.[23]  The State and local government facilities guidelines have not been adopted by the Department of Justice or Department of Transportation. 

 

Play Areas Guidelines

 

In 2000, the Access Board amended ADAAG by adding guidelines for play areas used by children.[24]  These guidelines address access to ground level and elevated play components, and ground surfaces.  The Access Board prepared a regulatory assessment for the play areas guidelines.[25]  The play areas guidelines have not been adopted by the Department of Justice or Department of Transportation. 

 

Recreation Facilities Guidelines

 

In 2002, the Access Board amended ADAAG by adding guidelines for recreation facilities.[26]  These guidelines address access to amusement rides, boating and fishing facilities, golf courses, miniature golf courses, exercise equipment, bowling lanes, shooting facilities, and swimming pools and spas.  The Access Board prepared a regulatory assessment for the recreation facilities guidelines.[27]  The recreation facilities guidelines have not been adopted by the Department of Justice or Department of Transportation. 

 

The guidelines for play areas and recreation facilities were developed through separate rulemaking processes that involved advisory committees and regulatory negotiation, and were not part of the present rulemaking to revise the guidelines.  The guidelines for play areas and recreation facilities are incorporated in the final revised guidelines without any substantive changes.

1.3  Need to Revise Guidelines

 

Since the enactment of the Americans with Disabilities Act, accessibility requirements have been increasingly incorporated into the model codes.  State and local governments adopt the model codes to regulate building construction.  The model codes are revised every three years.  The model codes reference the ICC/ANSI A117.1 Standard on Accessible and Usable Buildings and Facilities for technical requirements.  The ICC/ANSI A117.1 standard is revised every five years.

 

Federal accessibility requirements need to keep pace with the model codes and standards as they are revised.  The Access Board has revised the guidelines for the Americans with Disabilities Act and Architectural Barriers Act to harmonize the guidelines with the model codes and standards in order to achieve greater consistency and uniformity in accessibility requirements at the Federal, State, and local government levels.  The Access Board has also revised the guidelines to ensure that Federal facilities provide the same level of accessibility as State and local government facilities, and private facilities.

1.4  Rulemaking History

 

The Access Board established the ADAAG Review Advisory Committee in 1994 to recommend revisions to the guidelines.  The advisory committee consisted of 22 organizations representing model codes and standards groups, State and local governments, the building and construction industry, and individuals with disabilities.[28]  The advisory committee issued its report, “Recommendations for a New ADAAG,” in 1996.  The Access Board used the advisory committee’s report to develop a proposed rule that was published in 1999.[29]  Public hearings were held on the proposed rule in Los Angeles and Washington, DC.  Information meetings were also held in Washington, D.C. to hear from industry and disability groups on issues regarding automated teller machines, reach ranges, and captioning equipment for movie theaters.  Throughout the rulemaking process, the Access Board worked collaboratively with the International Code Council and ANSI A117 Committee to harmonize the guidelines with the new International Building Code, which was first issued in 2000 and revised in 2003; and the ICC/ANSI A117.1 standard, which was revised in 1998 and 2003.  The Access Board released a draft of the final revised guidelines in April 2002 to further promote harmonization with the model codes and standards.[30]

1.5  Final Revised Guidelines   

 

The final revised guidelines consist of three parts which are published as separate appendices to 36 C.F.R. Part 1191.

 

• Appendix B contains ADA Chapters 1 and 2 of the guidelines, which establish application and scoping requirements for facilities covered by the Americans with Disabilities Act.  The scoping requirements specify what features of a newly constructed or altered facility must be accessible.  Where multiple features that serve the same function are provided, such as parking spaces in a garage or seats in an assembly area, the scoping requirements specify how many of the features must be accessible.

 

• Appendix C contains ABA Chapters 1 and 2 of the guidelines, which establish application and scoping requirements for facilities covered by the Architectural Barriers Act.  The scoping requirements in Appendix C are mostly the same as those in Appendix B.  A few requirements are different based on the Architectural Barriers Act.  Appendix C, for example, includes scoping requirements for facilities leased by Federal agencies.

 

• Appendix D contains Chapters 3 through 10 of the guidelines, which establish common technical requirements for facilities covered by the Americans with Disabilities Act and Architectural Barriers Act.  The technical requirements provide dimensions and specifications for making the features of a facility accessible.

 

Appendix A contains the Table of Contents, and Appendix E contains the List of Figures and Index for the final revised guidelines.

1.6  President’s Priorities

 

On July 26, 2002, President George W. Bush issued a Proclamation on the twelfth anniversary of the Americans with Disabilities Act calling the statute “one of the most compassionate and successful civil rights laws in American history.”  The President committed his Administration to implementing the Americans with Disabilities Act and “removing the barriers that prevent people with disabilities from realizing their full potential and achieving their dreams.”  The final revised guidelines will promote the President’s priorities by improving implementation of the Americans with Disabilities Act’s accessibility requirements.

1.7  Federalism

 

The Americans with Disabilities Act was enacted “to provide clear, strong, consistent, and enforceable standards addressing discrimination against individuals with disabilities [and] to ensure that the Federal Government plays a central role in enforcing the standards.”[31]  The Architectural Barriers Act was enacted to provide individuals with disabilities access to federally financed facilities.  Ensuring the civil rights of groups who have experienced discrimination has long been recognized as a national issue and a proper function of the Federal government. 

The Americans with Disabilities Act recognizes the authority of State and local governments to enact and enforce laws that “provide greater or equal protection for the rights of individuals with disabilities than are afforded by this chapter.”[32] 

 

The final revised guidelines serve as the basis for enforceable standards issued by other Federal agencies under the Americans with Disabilities Act and Architectural Barriers Act. 

The final revised guidelines adhere to the fundamental federalism principles and policy making criteria in Executive Order 13132.  The Access Board consulted with State and local governments throughout the rulemaking process.  State and local governments were represented on the ADAAG Review Advisory Committee, participated in public hearings, and submitted comments on the proposed rule.  The final revised guidelines are harmonized with model codes that are adopted by State and local governments to regulate building construction.

 

Regulations that implement statutory rights that prohibit discrimination on the basis of disability are exempt from the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, which requires agencies to assess the effects of regulatory actions on State and local governments.[33]
 

---

CHAPTER 2:  METHODOLOGY

2.0  Baseline

 

Regulatory actions are compared to a baseline to evaluate their potential impacts.  The baseline is a reasonable forecast of what would happen in the absence of the regulatory action.  As explained below, the final revised guidelines are compared to the current guidelines and the International Building Code.  In addition, the final revised guidelines concerning common use circulation paths in employee work areas, accessible means of egress, and visible alarms in hotel guest rooms with communication features are compared to the model fire and life safety codes.

 

Current Guidelines

 

 In the absence of the final revised guidelines, newly constructed and altered facilities covered by the Americans with Disabilities Act would have to comply with ADAAG as initially issued in 1991, which has been adopted as enforceable standards by the Department of Justice and Department of Transportation.[34]  Newly constructed, altered, and leased facilities covered by the Architectural Barriers Act that are subject to standards issued by the General Services Administration are also required to comply with ADAAG, where it provides a greater level of access compared to UFAS. [35] 

 

The final revised guidelines reorganize and renumber ADAAG, and rewrite the text to be clearer and easier to understand.  Most of the scoping and technical requirements in ADAAG have not been changed.  An independent codes expert compared the final revised guidelines and ADAAG to identify revisions that add new features or space to facilities, or present design challenges compared to ADAAG.[36]  The codes expert identified 27 revisions that are expected to have minimal impacts on the new construction and alterations of facilities, which are discussed in Chapter 6; and 14 revisions that are expected to have monetary impacts on the new construction and alterations of facilities, which are discussed in Chapter 7. 

 

Comparing the final revised guidelines to the current guidelines represents the upper bound of the range of potential impacts, and assumes that facilities covered by the Americans with Disabilities Act or Architectural Barriers Act are not required to also comply with equivalent requirements in the International Building Code. 

 

International Building Code

 

The International Building Code was first issued in 2000 and revised in 2003.  The 2000 and 2003 editions of the International Building Code reference the 1998 edition of the ICC/ANSI A117.1 Standard on Accessible and Usable Buildings and Facilities for technical requirements. 

 

In the absence of the final revised guidelines, newly constructed and altered facilities would have to comply with the International Building Code in jurisdictions where the code has been adopted.  As shown in Table 2.1, the International Building Code has been adopted statewide in 28 States and by local governments in 15 States.[37]  The District of Columbia, the Department of Defense, and the National Park Service have also adopted the International Building Code.  

 

Table 2.1 – State and Local Government Adoption of International Building Code (text version)

* Number of local governments that have adopted the International Building Code is shown in parenthesis

 

The final revised guidelines are compared to the 2000 and 2003 editions of the International Building Code to identify whether the codes contain equivalent requirements.  Comparing the final revised guidelines to the International Building Code represents the lower bound of the range of potential impacts, and assumes that facilities covered by the Americans with Disabilities Act or Architectural Barriers Act are required to also comply with equivalent requirements in the International Building Code.  The actual impacts will be between the lower and upper bound of the range.

 

Model Fire and Life Safety Codes

 

The final revised guidelines concerning common use circulation paths in employee work areas, accessible means of egress, and visible alarms in hotel guest rooms with communication features are also compared to relevant requirements in the 2003 editions of the NFPA 101, Life Safety Code; NFPA 1, Uniform Fire Code; and International Fire Code.  As shown in Table 2.2, these model codes have been adopted statewide by 48 States.[38]  The other two States, New Jersey and Ohio, have adopted the International Building Code, which contains equivalent requirements to the International Fire Code for means of egress and visible alarms.

 

Table 2.2 - Statewide Adoption of Model Fire and Life Safety Codes (text version)

2.1  Timing of Impacts

 

The final revised guidelines are not enforceable and will not have any impacts until they are adopted as enforceable standards by the following agencies:

 

• Department of Justice for State and local government facilities, places of public accommodation, and commercial facilities.

 

• Department of Transportation for public transportation facilities owned or operated by State and local governments, and the National Railroad Passenger Corporation.

 

• Department of Housing and Urban Development for federally financed residential facilities.

 

• Department of Defense for military facilities.

 

• United States Postal Service for postal facilities.

 

• General Services Administration for all other federally financed facilities.

 

The Department of Justice, Department of Transportation, Department of Housing and Urban Development, and General Services Administration will have to conduct notice and comment rulemaking to adopt the final revised guidelines as enforceable standards.[39]  More State and local governments are expected to adopt the International Building Code by the time the final revised guidelines are adopted as enforceable standards by the above agencies, which will further reduce the potential impacts toward the lower bound of the range.

 

2.2  Benefits

 

The Access Board worked collaboratively with the International Code Council and the ANSI A117 Committee to harmonize the final revised guidelines with the 2000 and 2003 editions of the International Building Code and the 1998 and 2003 editions of the ICC/ANSI A117.1 Standard for Accessible and Usable Buildings and Facilities.  Harmonization will benefit State and local governments, businesses, architects, and individuals with disabilities.  These benefits are discussed in Chapter 3.  The Access Board also revised some of the scoping and technical requirements in ADAAG to reduce the impacts on facilities.  These revisions are discussed in Chapter 5.

 

2.3  Alternatives

 

The regulatory assessment for the proposed rule estimated that the national costs of the rule would be $87.5 million annually for newly constructed office buildings, hotels, and sports stadiums and arenas.  The Access Board adopted alternatives in the final revised guidelines that eliminate these costs.  These alternatives are discussed in Chapter 4.

2.4  New Construction

 

Designing facilities to be accessible from the beginning generally has minimal impacts on the total construction costs.  Most of the scoping and technical requirements do not add new features or space to facilities, but rather require that features commonly provided meet certain specifications so individuals with disabilities are included.  Most designs are produced today with the assistance of computers.  Designers can simply incorporate the specifications into their computer assisted design (CAD) programs.  This assessment focuses on revisions in the final revised guidelines that either add new features or space to facilities, or present design challenges.

 

2.5  Alterations to Existing Facilities

 

There are two general requirements and an exception that apply to alterations to existing facilities:

 

Element or Space Altered – When an element or space is altered, the altered element or space is required to meet the requirements for new construction.[40]  If the circulation path to the altered element or space is not altered, an accessible route is not required to the altered element or space, unless the altered area contains a primary function.

 

Alterations Affecting Primary Function Areas – If the alterations affect or could affect the usability of or access to an area containing a primary function, the Department of Justice and Department of Transportation regulations implementing the Americans with Disabilities Act require the “path of travel” serving the altered area to be made accessible to the extent that the costs do not exceed 20 percent of the costs of the alterations to the primary function area.[41]  A primary function is a major activity for which the facility is intended.[42]  The “path of travel” includes an accessible route that connects the altered area with an exterior approach, and the toilet rooms, public telephones, and drinking fountains serving the altered primary function area.[43]  When the Department of Justice and Department of Transportation adopt the final revised guidelines as enforceable standards, they will address what an entity’s obligations are when elements that are part of the “path of travel” serving an altered primary function area meet earlier standards, and the revised standards change the requirements for the elements.

 

Technical Infeasibility – If it is not technically feasible to comply with a requirement because existing structural conditions would require removing or altering a load-bearing member that is an essential part of the structural frame or because of other existing physical or site constraints, the alteration is required to meet the requirement to the maximum extent feasible.[44]

 

The impacts of the revisions on alterations to existing facilities will be facility specific, and will depend on the elements and spaces that are altered.  For revisions that have monetary impacts, this assessment examines the impacts of the revisions on alterations to existing facilities by answering three questions:

 

• Is the element or space typically altered?

 

• Is the element or space part of the “path of travel” serving a primary function area?[45]

 

• Does alteration of the element or space involve technical infeasibility?

 

This assessment also includes alterations projects when estimating the national costs of the final revised guidelines for office buildings, hotels, hospitals and nursing homes, and Federal, State, and local government housing.  

 

2.6  Readily Achievable Barrier Removal

 

The Americans with Disabilities Act requires places of public accommodation to remove architectural and communication barriers that are structural in nature in existing facilities, where it is readily achievable.[46]  Readily achievable is defined as actions that are “easily accomplishable and able to be carried out without much difficulty or expense.”[47]  The Department of Justice is responsible for issuing regulations to implement the readily achievable “barrier removal” requirement.  When the Department of Justice adopts the final revised guidelines as enforceable standards, it will address what an entity’s obligations are when an element in an existing facility meets earlier standards, and the revised standards change the requirements for the element.  This assessment does not address the impacts of the final revised guidelines on readily achievable “barrier removal” in existing facilities since the Department of Justice will address this issue when it adopts the final revised guidelines as enforceable standards. 

 

---

CHAPTER 3:  HARMONIZATION BENEFITS

3.0  Introduction

 

The Access Board worked collaboratively with the International Code Council and the ANSI A117 Committee to harmonize the final revised guidelines with the new International Building Code, which was first issued in 2000 and revised in 2003, and the ICC/ANSA A117.1 Standard on Accessible and Usable Buildings and Facilities, which was revised in 1998 and 2003.  The 2000 and 2003 editions of the International Building Code reference the 1998 edition of the ICC/ANSI A117.1 standard for technical requirements.  As discussed below, harmonization benefits State and local governments, businesses, architects, and individuals with disabilities.   

3.1  State and Local Governments

State and local governments that adopt the model codes and standards want accessibility requirements in the model codes and standards and at the Federal level to be harmonized.  The Americans with Disabilities Act authorizes the Department of Justice to certify State or local codes that meet or exceed Federal accessibility requirements.[48]  State and local governments that adopt the International Building Code will find it easier to have their codes certified, and more State and local governments are expected to submit their codes to the Department of Justice for certification.[49]  In jurisdictions where codes have been certified by the Department of Justice, business owners, builders, developers, and architects can rely on their State or local government building plan approval and inspection processes as a “check-point” for ensuring that their facilities comply with Federal accessibility requirements.  Potential mistakes can be corrected early in the construction process when adjustments can be made easily and inexpensively compared to costly retrofitting after a facility is constructed.  Compliance with a certified code is also evidence of compliance with Federal accessibility requirements in litigation to enforce the Americans with Disabilities Act.[50] 

3.2  Businesses

 

Business owners, builders, and developers want consistent and uniform accessibility requirements adopted by the Federal, State, and local governments.  It is difficult and time consuming for them to deal with different accessibility requirements at each layer of government.  Dealing with different accessibility requirements at the Federal, State, and local levels can also contribute to mistakes requiring costly corrections after the facilities are constructed.    Harmonization of accessibility requirements at the Federal, State, and local levels promotes efficiency and economic growth for businesses.

3.3  Architects

 

Architects who design buildings also want consistent and uniform accessibility requirements adopted by the Federal, State, and local governments.  Architects bear the primary responsibility for designing facilities that meet accessibility requirements and are potentially liable for any mistakes that could result in litigation.  Harmonization of accessibility requirements at the Federal, State, and local levels makes it easier for architects to design accessible facilities and reduces the potential for mistakes and litigation.

3.4  Individuals with Disabilities

 

Individuals with disabilities are the ultimate beneficiaries of harmonization.  The U.S. Census Bureau reports that there are 52.5 million Americans with disabilities in the civilian non-institutionalized population age 5 and over.[51]  Almost one in five individuals has some type of disability.  Among individuals 15 years old and over, 25 million have difficulty walking or using stairs.  Harmonization will result in increased compliance with Federal accessibility requirements in jurisdictions that adopt the model codes and standards, and use their plan approval and inspection processes to check for compliance.  Increased compliance will result in more accessible facilities for individuals with disabilities.

 

---

CHAPTER 4:  ALTERNATIVES THAT ELIMINATE COSTS ESTIMATED FOR THE PROPOSED RULE
 

4.0  Introduction

 

The regulatory assessment for the proposed rule estimated that the national costs of the rule would be $87.5 million annually for newly constructed office buildings, hotels, and sports stadiums and arenas.[52]  The Access Board adopted alternatives in the final revised guidelines that eliminate these costs.  This chapter discusses the alternatives that were adopted.  The relevant text of the current guidelines, the proposed rule, and the final revised guidelines is presented in tables.  Unless otherwise noted, the current guidelines refer to ADAAG.  Scoping and technical requirements are presented together, where appropriate.  The text of the proposed rule that imposed the cost and the text of the final revised guidelines that eliminates the cost are underlined.  Where a new requirement was included in the proposed rule, but is not included in the final revised guidelines, there is no underlined text in the final revised guidelines.  Equivalent requirements in the International Building Code and the ICC/ANSI A117.1 Standard on Accessible and Usable Buildings and Facilities are also noted in the tables.[53]

4.1  Office Buildings

 

The proposed rule added a new scoping requirement for visible alarms in employee work areas. The regulatory assessment for the proposed rule estimated the national costs of the revision for newly constructed office buildings would be $16 million annually.  As discussed below, the final revised guidelines eliminate these costs.

 

Visible Alarms in Employee Work Areas

 

Table 4.1 shows the relevant text of the current guidelines, the proposed rule, and the final revised guidelines with respect to the scoping requirement for visible alarms in employee work areas.

 

Table 4.1 - Visible Alarms in Employee Work Areas (text version)

Current Guidelines	Proposed Rule	Final Revised Guidelines
4.1.1(3)  Areas Used Only by Employees as Work Areas.  Areas that are used only as work areas shall be designed and constructed so that individuals with disabilities can approach, enter, and exit the areas.  These guidelines do not require that any areas used only as work areas be constructed to permit maneuvering within the work area or be constructed or equipped (i.e., with racks or shelves) to be accessible.   4.1.3  Accessible Buildings: New Construction.  Accessible buildings and facilities shall meet the following minimum requirements: . . .   (14)  If emergency warning systems are provided, then they shall include both audible alarms and visual alarms complying with 4.28. . . .	203.3  Employee Work Areas.  Employee work areas shall be designed and constructed so that individuals with disabilities can approach enter, and exit the employee work areas.  In addition, visual alarm coverage shall be provided where audible alarm coverage is provided in employee work areas.  This part does not require that employee work areas be constructed to permit maneuvering with the employee work area or be constructed or equipped to be accessible.   215.1  Fire Alarms.  Where fire alarm systems are provided in public use or common use areas, the alarm shall provide a system with both audible and visual signals complying with 702. . . .	203.9  Employee Work Areas.  Spaces and elements within employee work areas shall only be required to comply with 206.2.8, 207.1, and 215.3 and shall be designed and constructed so that individuals with disabilities can approach, enter, and exit the employee work area. . . .   215.1  General.  Where fire alarm systems provide audible alarm coverage, alarms shall comply with 215. . . .   215.2  Public and Common Use Areas.  Alarms in public and common use areas shall comply with 702.   215.3  Employee Work Areas.  Where employee work areas have audible alarm coverage, the wiring system shall be designed so that visible alarms complying with 702 can be integrated into the alarm system.
Model Codes & Standards
IBC 2000:  No requirement for visible alarms in employee work areas.   IBC 2003:  Section 907.9.1.2 has an equivalent requirement for visible alarms in employee work areas.

 

The current guidelines require visible alarms to be provided where fire alarm systems are provided, but do not require areas used only by employees as work areas to be equipped with accessibility features.  As applied to office buildings, the current guidelines require visible alarms to be provided in public and common use areas such as conference rooms, break rooms, and restrooms, where fire alarm systems are provided. 

 

The proposed rule required visible alarm coverage to be provided in employee work areas where audible alarm coverage is provided.  Since building codes and fire and life safety codes generally require visible alarms in open-plan office areas, the regulatory assessment for the proposed rule estimated the impact of extending visible alarm coverage to individual offices.  The cost of installing a single 15 candela visible alarm appliance in an individual office was estimated at $270.[54]  A newly constructed office building with 200,000 square feet in area was estimated to require an additional 250 visible alarm appliances, plus additional power supply and circuits for the alarm system, which would increase the construction cost by $65,375.[55]  The regulatory assessment for the proposed rule estimated the national costs of requiring visible alarms in employee work areas would be $16 million annually for 250 newly constructed office buildings.[56]

 

The final revised guidelines eliminate these costs by requiring the alarm wiring system to be designed so that visible alarms can be added when needed to serve employees who are deaf or hard of hearing.  In new construction, alarm systems are typically designed with circuits at 80 percent of their capacity and the alarm wiring is run through the spaces that are provided with alarm coverage.  In typical configurations with offices along both sides of a corridor, or with offices on one side and open-plan work areas on the other side, the alarm wiring is commonly run in line with the corridor.  This design allows for short wiring “runs” to provide audible and visible alarm appliances in the public and common use areas, and open-plan work areas.  This design also places the alarm wiring in a location where it is relatively easy to extend the wiring into an individual office and install a visible alarm appliance when needed.

4.2  Hotels

 

The proposed rule revised the scoping requirement for guest rooms with communication features.  The regulatory assessment for the proposed rule estimated the national costs of the revision for newly constructed hotels would be $31 million annually.  As discussed below, the final revised guidelines eliminate these costs.

 

Guest Rooms with Communication Features

 

Table 4.2 shows the relevant text of the current guidelines, the proposed rule, and the final revised guidelines with respect to the scoping requirement for guest rooms with communications features.[57]

 

Table 4.2 – Guest Rooms with Communication Features (text version)

 

The current guidelines require hotels to provide a minimum number of guest rooms with mobility features based on the total number of guest rooms in the facility.  The current guidelines require an additional minimum number of guest rooms to provide roll-in showers.  All the guest rooms that are required to provide mobility features and roll-in showers are also required to provide communication features for individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing.  The current guidelines also require hotels to provide an additional minimum number of guest rooms with communication features for individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing.

 

The proposed rule required a minimum of 50 percent of the total number of guest rooms to provide communication features.  The regulatory assessment for the proposed rule estimated the cost of providing communication features in a guest room at $556, including $293 for a 110 candela visible alarm appliance and $263 for a notification device.[58]  The proposed rule required a newly constructed hotel with 150 guest rooms to provide a minimum of 75 guest rooms with communication features, compared to a minimum of 12 guest rooms under the current guidelines, which would increase the construction cost by $35,028.[59]  The regulatory assessment for the proposed rule estimated the national costs of increasing the number of guest rooms required to provide communication features to a minimum of 50 percent of the total number of guest rooms would be $31 million annually for 890 newly constructed hotels.[60]

 

The final revised guidelines make no change from the current guidelines with respect to the number of guest rooms required to provide communication features.  The scoping requirement is consolidated into a single table in the final revised guidelines, instead of appearing in three sections as in the current guidelines.  The final revised guidelines also limit the overlap between guest rooms required to provide mobility features and guest rooms required to provide communication features.  At least one, but not more than 10 percent, of the guest rooms required to provide mobility features can also provide communication features.

4.3  Sports Stadiums and Arenas

 

The proposed rule revised the scoping requirements for vertical access, vertical dispersion of wheelchair spaces, companion seats, and designated aisle seats in assembly areas. The regulatory assessment for the proposed rule estimated the national costs of the revisions for newly constructed sports stadiums and arenas would be $40.5 million.  As discussed below, the final revised guidelines eliminate these costs.

 

Vertical Access

 

Table 4.3 shows the relevant text of the current guidelines, the proposed rule, and the final revised guidelines with respect to the scoping requirement for vertical access.

 

Table 4.3 - Vertical Access (text version)

 

The current guidelines require one accessible passenger elevator to serve each level in multi-story facilities, unless an exception applies.  If more than one elevator is provided, each elevator is required to be accessible. 

 

The proposed rule required elevators or platform lifts to be provided to wheelchair spaces and designated aisle seats in sports stadiums and arenas in sufficient number, capacity, and speed so as to provide a level of service equivalent to that provided in the same seating area to patrons who can use stairs.  The regulatory assessment for the proposed rule assumed large sports facilities with 50,000 seats would add 3 more elevators to provide equivalent vertical access to wheelchair spaces and designated aisle seats; medium sports facilities with 20,000 seats would add 2 more elevators; and small sports facilities with 11,000 seats would add 1 more elevator.[61]  The cost of installing a 3-stop hydraulic elevator was estimated at $61,794.[62]  The regulatory assessment for the proposed rule estimated the national costs of requiring equivalent vertical access to wheelchair spaces and designated aisle seats would be $1.5 million annually for 3 large, 5 medium, and 5 small newly constructed sports facilities.[63]

 

The final revised guidelines make no change from the current guidelines with respect to accessible routes in multi-story facilities.

 

Vertical Dispersion of Wheelchair Spaces[64]

 

Table 4.4 shows the relevant text of the current guidelines, the proposed rule, and the final revised guidelines with respect to the scoping requirement for vertical dispersion of wheelchair spaces in assembly areas.
 

Table 4.4 – Vertical Dispersion of Wheelchair Spaces (text version)

 

The current guidelines require wheelchair spaces to be located in more than one area where the seating capacity exceeds 300 and to provide a choice of admission prices.  Under the current guidelines, sports facilities typically locate some wheelchair spaces on each accessible level of the facilities.

 

The proposed rule required wheelchair spaces and designated aisle seats to be provided in each price level distinguishable by location, and to be located at varying distances from the performance area on each accessible level and in each balcony or mezzanine that is located along an accessible route.  The regulatory assessment for the proposed rule assumed large sports facilities with 50,000 seats would add an additional upper deck concourse to achieve this level of dispersion, which would increase the construction cost by $11 million, and estimated the national costs would be $33 million annually for 3 newly constructed large sports facilities.[65]  The regulatory assessment for the proposed rule further assumed medium sports facilities with 20,000 seats would add 4 lifts, and small sports facilities with 11,000 seats would add 2 lifts.[66]  The cost of installing a lift was estimated at $14,213, and the national costs would be $0.5 million annually for 5 medium and 5 small newly constructed sports facilities.[67]

 

The final revised guidelines do not require wheelchair spaces to be dispersed based on admission prices because pricing is not always established at the design phase and may vary by event.  Instead of requiring wheelchair spaces to be vertically dispersed on each accessible level, the final revised guidelines require wheelchair spaces to be vertically dispersed at varying distances from the screen, performance area, or playing field.  The final revised guidelines also require wheelchair spaces to be located in each balcony or mezzanine served by an accessible route.  Sports facilities can meet the requirements by locating some wheelchair spaces on each accessible level of the facilities, which is consistent with the current guidelines.

Companion Seats

 

Table 4.5 shows the relevant text of the current guidelines, the proposed rule, and the final revised guidelines with respect to the scoping and technical requirements for companion seats in assembly areas.

 

Table 4.5 - Companion Seats (text version)

 

The current guidelines require at least one fixed companion seat to be provided next to each wheelchair space. 

 

The proposed rule required companion seats to be designed so the seat can be readily removed and serve as a wheelchair space.  The regulatory assessment for the proposed rule estimated 6 square feet must be added to the companion seat space to make it serve as a wheelchair space; and an anchoring system must be provided to make the seat removable.  These requirements would add $1,315 per seat to the construction cost.[68]  A newly constructed large sports facility with 50,000 seats must provide 501 companion seats, which would add $661,320 to the construction cost.[69]  A newly constructed medium sports facility with 20,000 seats must provide 201 companion seats, which would add $265,320 to the construction cost.[70]  A newly constructed small sports facility with 11,000 seats must provide 111 companion seats, which would add $146,520 to the construction cost.[71]  The regulatory assessment for the proposed rule estimated the national costs for requiring removable companion seats that can also serve as wheelchair spaces would be $4 million annually for 3 large, 5 medium, and 5 small newly constructed sports facilities.

 

The final revised guidelines permit companion seats to be readily removable, but do not require the seats to be designed so they can also serve as wheelchair spaces when removed. 

 

Designated Aisle Seats

 

Table 4.6 shows the relevant text of the current guidelines, the proposed rule, and the final revised guidelines with respect to the scoping and technical requirements for designated aisle seats in assembly areas.

 

Table 4.6 - Designated Aisle Seats (text version)

 

The current guidelines require 1 percent of fixed seats in assembly areas to be designated aisle seats.  Designated aisle seats must have either no armrests or folding or retractable armrests on the aisle side of the seat.

 

The proposed rule required at least 25 percent of the designated aisle seats to be located on an accessible route, and the rest to be located no more than two rows from an accessible route.  The regulatory assessment for the proposed rule assumed large and medium sports facilities would add accessible routes to comply with this requirement.[72]  The upper deck concourses added to large sports facilities to comply with the proposed rule’s vertical dispersion requirements for wheelchair spaces were assumed to also provide the accessible routes needed to comply with the proposed rule’s designated aisle seat requirements.[73]  The regulatory assessment for the proposed rule further assumed medium sports facilities with 20,000 seats would add 1,500 square feet to provide accessible routes to the designated aisle seats, and would increase the construction cost by $306,000.[74]  The regulatory assessment for the proposed rule estimated the national costs would be $1.5 million annually for 5 medium newly constructed sports facilities.[75]

 

The final revised guidelines base the number of required designated aisle seats on the number of aisle seats, instead of all the seats in a sports facility as the current guidelines do.  At least 5 percent of the aisle seats are required to be designated aisle seats and to be located closest to accessible routes.  This revision will almost always result in fewer aisle seats being designated aisle seats compared to the current guidelines.  Sports facilities typically locate designated aisle seats on, or as near to, accessible routes as permitted by the configuration of the facilities. 

 

---

 

CHAPTER 5:  REVISIONS THAT REDUCE IMPACTS 

5.0  Introduction

 

This chapter discusses revisions to the scoping and technical requirements that will reduce impacts on the new construction and alterations of facilities.  Some of the revisions will significantly reduce impacts, such as the revised scoping requirements for wheelchair spaces and assistive listening systems in large assembly areas, and the exceptions for accessible routes to small press boxes.  The relevant text of the current guidelines and the final revised guidelines is presented in tables.  Unless otherwise noted, the current guidelines refer to ADAAG.  The requirements are presented in the order in which they appear in the final revised guidelines.  Scoping and technical requirements are presented together, where appropriate.  The text of the final revised guidelines that will reduce the impacts is underlined.  Where the current guidelines contain related text, it is also underlined.  Equivalent requirements in the International Building Code and the ICC/ANSI A117.1 Standard on Accessible and Usable Buildings and Facilities are also noted in the tables.[76]

5.1  Limited Access Spaces and Machinery Spaces

 

Table 5.1 shows the relevant text of the current guidelines and the final revised guidelines with respect to the exceptions for limited access spaces and machinery spaces.

 

Table 5.1 – Limited Access Spaces and Machinery Spaces (text version)

 

The current guidelines contain an exception that exempts “non-occupiable” spaces that have limited means of access, such as ladders or very narrow passageways, and that are visited only by service personnel for maintenance, repair, or occasional monitoring of equipment from all accessibility requirements.  The final revised guidelines expand this exception by removing the condition that the exempt spaces be “non-occupiable,” and by separating the other conditions into two independent exceptions: one for spaces with limited means of access, and the other for machinery spaces.  More spaces are exempted by these exceptions to the final revised guidelines.

 

5.2  Operable Parts[77]

 

Table 5.2 shows the relevant text of the current guidelines and the final revised guidelines with respect to the scoping and technical requirements for operable parts.

 

Table 5.2 – Operable Parts (text version)

 

The current guidelines and the final revised guidelines require operable parts on accessible elements, along accessible routes, and in accessible rooms and spaces to comply with the technical requirements for operable parts, including height and operation.  The current guidelines contain an exception that exempts “special equipment [that] dictates otherwise,” and electrical and communications systems receptacles not intended for use by building occupants from the technical requirement for height.  The final revised guidelines divide this exception into three new exceptions covering operable parts intended only for use by service or maintenance personnel; electrical or communication receptacles serving a dedicated use; and floor electrical receptacles.  Operable parts covered by these new exceptions are exempt from all the technical requirements for operable parts.  The final revised guidelines add new exceptions that exempt certain outlets at kitchen counters; HVAC diffusers; and redundant controls provided for a single element, other than light switches, from the technical requirements for operable parts.  The final revised guidelines also exempt gas pump nozzles from the technical requirement for activating force.

 

5.3  Accessible Routes from Site Arrival Points and Within Sites

 

Table 5.3 shows the relevant text of the current guidelines and the final revised guidelines with respect to the scoping requirements for accessible routes from site arrival points and within sites.

 

Table 5.3 – Accessible Routes from Site Arrival Points and Within Sites (text version)

 

The current guidelines and the final revised guidelines require at least one accessible route to be provided from site arrival points to an accessible building entrance, and at least one accessible route to connect accessible facilities on the same site.  The final revised guidelines add two new exceptions that exempt site arrival points and accessible facilities within a site from the accessible route requirements where the only means of access between them is a vehicular way that does not provide pedestrian access.

5.4  Accessible Routes to Tiered Dining Areas in Sports Facilities

 

Table 5.4 shows the relevant text of the current guidelines and the final revised guidelines with respect to the scoping requirement for accessible routes to dining areas.

 

Table 5.4 – Accessible Routes to Dining Areas (text version)

 

The current guidelines and the final revised guidelines require an accessible route to be provided to all dining areas, including raised or sunken dining areas.  The final revised guidelines add a new exception for tiered dining areas in sports facilities.  Dining areas in sports facilities are typically integrated into the seating bowl and are tiered to provide adequate lines of sight.  The new exception requires an accessible route to be provided to at least 25 percent of the tiered dining areas in sports facilities.  Each tier must have the same services and the accessible route must serve the accessible seating.

5.5  Accessible Routes to Press Boxes

 

Table 5.5 shows the relevant text of the current guidelines and the final revised guidelines with respect to the scoping requirement for accessible routes to press boxes.

 

Table 5.5 – Accessible Routes to Press Boxes (text version)

 

The current guidelines require all areas of newly constructed facilities to be accessible, and an accessible route to connect accessible entrances with all accessible spaces and elements within the facility.  The final revised guidelines add two new exceptions that exempt small press boxes that are located on bleachers with entrances on only one level, and small press boxes that are free-standing structures elevated more than 12 feet, from the accessible route requirement when the aggregate area of all press boxes in a sports facility does not exceed 500 square feet.  These new exceptions significantly reduce the impacts on high school sports facilities.

5.6  Shower and Sauna Doors in Hotel Guest Rooms

 

Table 5.6 shows the relevant text of the current guidelines and the final revised guidelines with respect to the scoping requirement for doors in hotel guest rooms.

 

Table 5.6 – Shower and Sauna Doors in Hotel Guest Rooms (text version)

 

The current guidelines and the final revised guidelines require doors in hotel guest rooms that do not provide mobility features to have at least 32 inches clear width.[78]  The final revised guidelines add a new exception that exempts shower and sauna doors from the requirement.

5.7  Limited-Use/Limited-Application Elevators and Private Residence Elevators

 

Table 5.7 shows the relevant text of the current guidelines and the final revised guidelines with respect to the scoping requirements for elevators.

 

Table 5.7 – Limited-Use/Limited-Application Elevators and Private Residence Elevators (text version)

 

The current guidelines and the final revised guidelines include exceptions to the scoping requirement for accessible routes that exempt certain facilities from connecting each story with an elevator.  If a facility is exempt from the scoping requirement, but nonetheless installs an elevator, the current guidelines require the elevator to comply with the technical requirements for passenger elevators.  The final revised guidelines add a new exception that allows a facility that is exempt from the scoping requirement to install a limited-use/limited-application (LULA) elevator.  LULA elevators are typically less expensive than passenger elevators, and are suitable for low-traffic, low-rise facilities.  LULA elevators are also permitted as an alternative to platform lifts.  The final revised guidelines also add a new exception that permits private residence elevators in multi-story dwelling units.  The final revised guidelines contain technical requirements for LULA elevators and private residence elevators.

 

5.8  Platform Lifts in Hotel Guest Rooms and Dwelling Units

 

Table 5.8 shows the relevant text of the current guidelines and the final revised guidelines with respect to the scoping requirement for platform lifts.

 

Table 5.8 – Platform Lifts in Hotel Guest Rooms and Dwelling Units (text version)

 

The current guidelines and the final revised guidelines limit the places where platform lifts are permitted to be used as part of an accessible route in new construction.  The final revised guidelines add a new scoping requirement that permits platform lifts to be used in hotel guest rooms and dwelling units with mobility features.

5.9  Parking Spaces[79]

 

Table 5.9 shows the relevant text of the current guidelines and the final revised guidelines with respect to the scoping requirements for parking spaces.

 

Table 5.9 – Parking Spaces (text version)

 

Where parking spaces are provided, the current guidelines and the final revised guidelines require a certain number of the parking spaces to be accessible.  The final revised guidelines add a new exception that exempts parking spaces used exclusively for buses, trucks, delivery vehicles, law enforcement vehicles, or for purposes of vehicular impound from the scoping requirement for parking spaces.  If a lot containing parking spaces for these vehicles is used by the public, the lot is required to have an accessible passenger loading zone. 

 

The current guidelines and the final revised guidelines require accessible parking spaces to be identified by signs that display the International Symbol of Accessibility.  The final revised guidelines add two new exceptions that exempt accessible parking spaces from the signage requirement.  The first exception exempts sites that have four or less parking spaces from the signage requirement.  This exception will reduce the impacts on small businesses.  The second exception exempts residential facilities where parking spaces are assigned to specific dwelling units from the signage requirement.

5.10     Passenger Loading Zones at Medical Care and Long-Term Care Facilities[80]

 

Table 5.10 shows the relevant text of the current guidelines and the final revised guidelines with respect to the scoping requirement for passenger loading zones at medical care and long-term care facilities.

 

Table 5.10 – Passenger Loading Zones at Medical Care and Long-Term Care Facilities (text version)

 

The current guidelines and the final revised guidelines require medical care and long-term care facilities, where the period of stay exceeds 24 hours, to provide at least one passenger loading zone at an accessible entrance.  The current guidelines also require a canopy or roof overhang at the passenger loading zone.  The final revised guidelines do not require a canopy or roof overhang.

 

5.11     Aisle Stairs and Ramps in Assembly Areas

 

Table 5.11 shows the relevant text of the current guidelines and the final revised guidelines with respect to the scoping and technical requirements for aisle stairs and ramps in assembly areas.

 

Table 5.11 – Aisle Stairs and Ramps in Assembly Areas (text version)