Print

[1]  29 U.S.C. § 792 (b) (3); 42 U.S.C. § 12204.

[2]  42 U.S.C. § 12101 (a) (5).

[3]  42 U.S.C. § 12101(b) (2) and (3).

[4]  42 U.S.C. §§ 12132, 12134, 12146, and 12183 (a) (1).

[5]  42 U.S.C. §§ 12132, 12134, 12147, and 12183 (a) (2).

[6]  42 U.S.C. § 12149.

[7]   42 U.S.C. §§ 12134 and 12186 (b).

[8]  42 U.S.C. § 4151 (1) and  (2).

[9]  42 U.S.C. § 4151(3) and (4).

[10]  42 U.S.C. § 4153.

[11]   42 U.S.C. § 4154.

[12]   42 U.S.C. § 4154a.

[13]   42 U.S.C. § 4152.

[14]  47 FR 33864 (August 4, 1982).  MGRAD was amended in 1988 and 1989.  53 FR 35510 (September 14, 1988); 54 FR 5444 (February 3, 1989).  MGRAD, as amended, is published at 36 C.F.R. Part 1190.

[15]  49 FR 31528 (August 7, 1984). 

[16]   56 FR 35408 (July 26, 1991); 56 FR 45500 (September 6, 1991).  As discussed in Chapter 1.2, ADAAG was amended several times since 1991.  ADAAG, as amended, is published at 36 C.F.R. Part 1191, Appendix A.

[17]  Final Regulatory Impact Analysis for Final Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines for Buildings and Facilities (January 9, 1992).

[18]  56 FR 35592 (July 26, 1991); 56 FR 45584 (September 6, 1991).  ADAAG, as adopted by the Department of Justice, is published at 28 C.F.R. Part 36, Appendix A.  ADAAG, as adopted by the Department of Transportation, is published at 49 C.F. R. Part 37, Appendix A.

[19]  41 C.F.R. § 102-76.25.  The Department of Defense has also adopted a policy to use ADAAG when it provides a greater level of access compared to UFAS.

[20]  63 FR 2000 (January 13, 1998).

[21]  63 FR 2060 (January 13, 1998). 

[22]  The guidelines do not require ramps or platform lifts to provide access to raised judges’ benches and other raised work stations within court rooms, provided sufficient space is allowed to add a ramp or platform lift in the future as needed without substantially altering the court room.  The guidelines require 2 percent of jail and prison cells to provide mobility features, and do not require cells to provide mobility features when existing facilities are altered.  UFAS requires 5 percent of jail and prison cells to provide mobility features.

[23]  The State and local government facilities guidelines were initially issued as an interim final rule in 1994.  59 FR 31676 (June 20, 1994).  The interim final rule also included guidelines for State and local government housing, and public rights-of-way.  The Access Board prepared a regulatory assessment for the interim final rule.  Regulatory Assessment, State and Local Government Facilities: Interim Final Rule (May 20, 1994).  The final guidelines only included judicial facilities, detention and correctional facilities, and other minor amendments to ADAAG.  The final guidelines mostly reduced impacts on State and local governments.

[24]  65 FR 62498 (October 18, 2000).

[25]  Final Accessibility Guidelines for Play Areas: Economic Assessment (October 2000).  The national costs of the play areas guidelines were estimated to range from $37 million to $84 million annually depending on the type of ground surface materials used.

[26]   67 FR 56352 (September 3, 2002).

[27]   Assessment of Benefits and Costs of Final Accessibility Guidelines for Recreation Facilities (September 2002).  The national costs of the recreation facilities guidelines were estimated to range from $27 million to $34 million annually.

[28]  The following organizations were represented on the advisory committee:  American Council of the Blind, American Institute of Architects, American Society of Interior Designers, The Arc, Builders Hardware Manufacturers Association, Building Officials and Code Administrators International, Building Owners and Managers Association, Council of American Building Officials, Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund,  Eastern Paralyzed Veterans Association, International Conference of Building Officials, International Facility Management Association, Maryland Association of the Deaf, National Conference of States on Building Codes and Standards, National Easter Seal Society, National Fire Protection Association, National Institute of Building Sciences, Regional Disability and Business Technical Assistance Centers, Southern Building Code Congress International, Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation, Virginia Building and Code Officials Association, and World Institute on Disability.

[29]  64 FR 62248 (November 16, 1999).

[30]  67 FR 15509 (April 2, 2002).

[31]  42 U.S.C. § 12101 (b) (2) and (3).

[32]  42 U.S.C. § 12201 (b).

[33]  2 U.S.C. § 1503 (2).

[34]  The Department of Justice permits State and local government facilities covered by the Americans with Disabilities Act to also comply with UFAS, subject to certain exceptions.  28 C.F.R. § 35.151 (c).

[35]  The final revised guidelines are compared to UFAS for scoping requirements applicable to alterations to primary function areas, and for scoping and technical requirements applicable to Federal, State, and local government housing. 

[36]  The codes expert, Lawrence G. Perry, AIA, represented the Building Owners and Managers Association (BOMA) on the ADAAG Review Advisory Committee.

[37]  The International Code Council website shows the State and local governments that have adopted the International Building Code.  See, www.iccsafe.org/government/adoptions.htm.  The data in Table 2.1 is as of June 4, 2004.  Some States and local governments amend the International Building Code or adopt separate accessibility codes to provide equivalent or greater accessibility than ADAAG.

[38]  The National Fire Protection Association and International Code Council websites show the States that have adopted the codes.   See, www.nfpa.org/BuildingCode/AboutC3/NFPA101/nfpa101.asp; www.nfpa.org/BuildingCode/AboutC3/NFPA1/nfpa1.asp ; and www.iccsafe.org/government/adoption.html.

[39]  The Department of Transportation issued a notice of proposed rulemaking to update its standards in 2000.  65 FR 48444 (August 8, 2000).  The Department of Defense and United States Postal Service update their standards by issuing an agency manual or memorandum.

[40]  ADAAG 4.1.6 (1) (b); section 202.3 of the final revised guidelines.

[41]  28 C.F.R. § 36.403; 49 C.F.R. § 37.43.  The requirements for alterations affecting primary function areas are also incorporated in ADAAG 4.1.6 (2) and section 202.4 of the final revised guidelines. 

[42]  28 C.F.R. § 36.403 (b); 49 C.F.R. § 37.43 (c).

[43]  28 C.F.R. § 36.403 (e) (1) to (3); 49 C.F.R. § 37.43 (d).

[44]  ADAAG 4.1.6 (1) (j); section 202.3 Exception 2 of the final revised guidelines.  

[45]  For purposes of this assessment, it is assumed that the “path of travel” serving the primary function area is not accessible.  As discussed above, the Department of Justice and Department of Transportation 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.

[46]  42 U.S.C. § 12182 (b) (2) (A) (iv).

 

[47]  42 U.S.C. § 12181 (9).

[48]  42 U.S.C. § 12188 (b) (1) (A) (ii). 

[49]  Florida, Maine, Maryland, Texas, and Washington have had their codes certified.  Four other States have requests for certification of their codes pending.

[50]  42 U.S.C. § 12188 (b) (1) (A) (ii).

[51]   U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Census.

[52]  Regulatory Assessment of Americans with Disabilities Act and Architectural Barriers Act Accessibility Guidelines Proposed Rule (August 19, 1999) (hereinafter referred to as “Proposed Rule Regulatory Assessment”).

[53]  Where requirements or exceptions in the International Building Code or the ICC/ANSI A117.1 standard are broader or narrower than the final revised guidelines, they are referred to as “similar” rather than “equivalent” to the final revised guidelines.

[54]  Proposed Rule Regulatory Assessment at 9.

[55]  Proposed Rule Regulatory Assessment at 27.  The assessment assumed that locating visible alarm appliances in adjacent offices back-to-back would reduce by one-half the amount of conduit and wiring used in estimating the cost for installing an appliance in an individual office.

[56]  Proposed Rule Regulatory Assessment at 37.

[57]  The final revised guidelines also revise the technical requirement for visible alarms in guest rooms with communication features, which is discussed in Chapter 6.27.

[58]  Proposed Rule Regulatory Assessment at 22-24.

[59]  Proposed Rule Regulatory Assessment at 28-29.

[60]  Proposed Rule Regulatory Assessment at 38.

[61]  Proposed Rule Regulatory Assessment at 32-35.

[62]  Proposed Rule Regulatory Assessment at 17.

[63]  Proposed Rule Regulatory Assessment at 40-41.

[64]  The scoping and technical requirements in the final revised guidelines for dispersion of wheelchair spaces and lines of sight in assembly areas are further discussed in Chapter 6.14.

[65]  Proposed Rule Regulatory Assessment at 33 and 41.

[66]  Proposed Rule Regulatory Assessment at 34-35.

[67]  Proposed Rule Regulatory Assessment at 18-19, and 41.

[68]  Proposed Rule Regulatory Assessment at 19-20.

[69]  Proposed Rule Regulatory Assessment at 33.

[70]  Proposed Rule Regulatory Assessment at 34.

[71]  Proposed Rule Regulatory Assessment at 35.

[72]  Proposed Rule Regulatory Assessment 20-21.

[73]  Proposed Rule Regulatory Assessment at 33.

[74]  Proposed Rule Regulatory Assessment at 34.

[75]  Proposed Rule Regulatory Assessment at 41.

[76]  Where requirements or exceptions in the International Building Code or the ICC/ANSI A117.1 standard are broader or narrower than the final revised guidelines, they are referred to as “similar” rather than “equivalent” to the final revised guidelines.

[77]   The final revised guidelines also revise the technical requirement for a side reach, which is discussed in Chapter 6.19.

[78]   Congress directed this requirement to be included in the guidelines so individuals with disabilities can visit guests in other rooms.  H. Rept. 101-485, pt. 2, at 118 (1990); S. Rept. 101-116, at 70 (1989).

[79]  The final revised guidelines also revise the scoping requirement for van accessible parking spaces, which is discussed in Chapters 7.3.

[80]  The final revised guidelines also revise the scoping and technical requirements for passenger loading zones, which are discussed in Chapter 6.8.

[81]  The final revised guidelines also add a new exception for toilet room doors overlapping fixture clearances; and revise the technical requirements the water closet location and rear wall grab bar, and the water closet clearance in toilet rooms, which are discussed in Chapters 5.23, 5.24, and 7.10, respectively.

[82]  The final revised guidelines also revise the technical requirements for assistive listening systems, which are discussed in Chapter 6.24.

[83]  The final revised guidelines also add specific scoping and technical requirements for dispersion of wheelchair spaces and lines of sight in assembly areas, and specific technical requirements for wheelchair space overlap in assembly areas, which are discussed in Chapters 6.14 and 6.26, respectively.

[84]  The final revised guidelines also add a new exception for toilet room doors overlapping fixture clearances; and revise the technical requirements for the water closet location and rear wall grab bar, and the water closet clearance in toilet rooms, which are discussed in Chapters 5.23, 5.24, and 7.10, respectively.

 

[85]  UFAS 4.34.7 requires washing machines and clothes dryers in dwelling units to comply with the technical requirements for a side reach.  In addition, UFAS 4.34.7.2 requires washing machines and clothes dryers in common use laundry rooms serving dwelling units to be front loading.

[86]   The final revised guidelines also add a new technical requirement for handrails along walking surfaces, which is discussed in Chapter 6.20.

[87]   The final revised guidelines also revise the technical requirements for the water closet location and rear wall grab bar, and the water closet clearance in toilet rooms, which are discussed in Chapters 5.24 and 7.10 respectively.

[88]  The final revised guidelines also add a new exception for toilet room doors overlapping fixture clearances, and revise the technical requirement for the water closet clearance in toilet rooms, which are discussed in Chapters 5.23 and 7.10, respectively. 

[89]   The final revised guidelines also revise the technical requirements for shower spray units, which are discussed in Chapter 7.11.

[90]  The detectable warnings requirement was initially suspended in 1994 for all areas, except transit platform edges, while additional research was conducted on the need for the warnings.  59 FR 17442 (April 12, 1994).  The suspension was renewed in 1996 and 1998, while the guidelines were being revised.  61 FR 39323 (July 29, 1996); 63 FR 64836 (November 23, 1998).  The suspension expired on July 26, 2001. 

[91]  The Access Board is conducting a separate rulemaking to establish guidelines for public rights-of-way, and will address detectable warnings at curb ramps in that rulemaking.  When that rulemaking is completed, the Access Board will further consider the appropriateness of providing detectable warnings at curb ramps within sites.

[92]  Where requirements or exceptions in the International Building Code or the ICC/ANSI A117.1 standard are broader or narrower than the final revised guidelines, they are referred to as “similar” rather than “equivalent” to the final revised guidelines.

[93]  ADAAG 4.1.6 (2) contains the same scoping requirements for alterations to primary function areas..

[94]  41 C.F.R. § 102-76.25. 

[95]  28 C.F.R. § 35.151 (c).

[96]  42 U.S.C. § 12112 (b) (5) (A) and (B).

[97]  As discussed in Chapter 5.1, the final revised guidelines also exempt limited access spaces and machinery spaces from all accessibility requirements. 

[98]  See Chapter 2.0 for a discussion of State adoption of model building codes and fire and life safety codes.  The 36 inch minimum width for emergency egress is specified in: section 7.3.4.1 of the NFPA 101, Life Safety Code (2003 edition); section 14.8.3.3.1 of the NFPA 1, Uniform Fire Code (2003 edition); section 1013.4.1 of the International Fire Code (2003 edition). The minimum width may be wider based on the occupant load.  The codes permit the width to be reduced in limited situations, many of which will be covered by the exceptions in the final revised guidelines.

[99]   Public accommodations and commercial facilities that are less than 3 stories, or that have less than 3,000 square feet per story are exempt from providing an accessible route between the stories, unless the facility contains a shopping center or shopping mall; professional office of a health care provider; airline passenger terminal; or terminal, depot, or other station used for specified public transportation.  ADAAG 4.1.3 (5) Exception 1; section 206.2.3 Exception 1 of the final revised guidelines.

[100]  Section 104.2 of the final revised guidelines requires the next greater whole number to be provided, when the required number of accessible elements is determined by the calculation of ratios or percentages, and remainders or fractions result. 

[101]  ADAAG 4.1.2 (1); section 206.2.1 of the final revised guidelines. 

[102]  ADAAG 4.8.1; section 403.3 of the final revised guidelines.

[103]  ADAAG 4.8.2; section 405.2 of the final revised guidelines.

[104]  See Chapter 2.5 for a discussion of alterations to primary function areas.

[105]  Section 407.2.1 Exception.

[106]  Section 407.2.1.1 Exception.

[107]  Section 407.2.1.2 Exception.

[108]  Section 407.2.1.5 Exception 2.

[109]  Section 407.2.2.1 Exception 2.

[110]  Section 407.2.2.2 Exception 2.

[111]  Section 407.2.2.3 Exception 2.

[112]  Section 407.3.2 Exception.

[113]  Section 407.3.3 Exception.

[114]  Section 407.3.6 Exception.

[115]  Section 407.4.1 Exception.

[116]  Sections 407.4.6 Exception and 407.4.7 Exception.

[117]  Section 407.4.6.1 Exception 2.

[118]  Section 407.4.6.2 Exception.

[119]  Section 407.4.7.1.2 Exception.

[120]  See Chapter 2.0 for a discussion of State adoption of model fire and life safety codes.  The number of accessible means of egress is specified in: Section 7.5.4.1 of the NFPA 101, Life Safety Code (2003 edition); section 14.10.4 of the NFPA 1, Uniform Fire Code (2003 edition); and section 1007.1 of the International Fire Code (2003 edition).

[121]  Evacuation elevators are specified in: sections 7.2.12.2.4, 7.5.4.5, and 7.5.4.7 of the NFPA 101 Life Safety Code (2003 edition); sections 14.10.4.5 and 14.10.4.7 of the NFPA 1, Uniform Fire Code (2003 edition); and sections 1007.2.1 and 1007.4 of the International Fire Code (2003 edition).

[122]  Mechanical access garages use lifts, elevators, or other mechanical devices to move vehicles from the street level to a parking tier.

[123]  The NFPA 101, Life Safety Code, has required 7/11 stairs since 1985 (see, section 5-2.2.2.1); the Uniform Building Code has required 7/11stairs since 1988 (see, section 3306 (c)); and the National Building Code has required 7/11stairs since 1990 (see, section 817.6). 

[124]  UFAS 4.34.6.5 contains a specific scoping requirement for sinks in dwelling units with mobility features.

[125]  The final revised guidelines also revise the scoping requirements for TTYs, which are discussed in Chapters 7.5.

[126]  36 C.F.R. § 1193.43 (e); 36 C.F.R. § 1194.23 (f).

[127]  The final revised guidelines also revise the scoping requirements for wheelchair spaces in assembly areas, and add specific technical requirements for wheelchair space overlap in assembly areas, which are discussed in Chapters 5.18 and 6.26, respectively.

[128]  Department of Justice, Accessible Stadiums (http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/ada/stadium.txt).  A leading design firm has entered into a consent decree with the Department of Justice to design wheelchair spaces in new sports stadiums and arenas where spectators are expected to stand during events so as to provide sightlines over the standing spectators.  United States of America v. Ellerbe Becket, Inc., Civil Action No. 4-96-995 (D. Minn. April 28, 1998).

  

[129]  The Department of Justice’s interpretation has been upheld in United States v. Cinemark, U.S.A. Inc., 348 F. 3rd 569 (6 Cir. 2003), cert. denied 72 U.S.L.W. 3763 (June 29, 2004); Oregon Paralyzed Veterans of America v. Regal Cinemas, Inc., 339 F. 3rd 1126 (9th Cir. 2003), cert. denied 72 U.S.L.W. 3763 (June 29, 2004); United States of America v. Hoyts Cinemas Corp., 256 F. Supp.2d 73 (D. Mass 2003), appeal pending; and United States of America v. AMC Entertainment, Inc., 232 F. Supp. 2d 1092 (C.D. Cal. 2002).  Contra: Lara v. Cinemark, U.S.A. Inc., 207 F.3d 783 (5th Cir. 2000), cert. denied 531 U.S. 944 (2000)).  See also: Meineker v. Hoyt Cinemas Corporation, 69 Fed. Appx. 19 (2nd Cir. 2003) vacating and remanding 216 F. Supp. 2d 14 (N.D.N.Y. 2002).

[130]  The Architectural Barriers Act covers facilities constructed, altered, or leased by the Federal government, and 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.  42 U.S.C. § 4151 (1) and (3).  Privately owned residential facilities that are not leased by the Federal government for subsidized housing programs are expressly excluded from the Architectural Barriers Act.  42  U.S.C. § 4151.  Regulations issued by the Department of Justice implementing the Americans with Disabilities Act cover facilities constructed or altered by, on behalf of, or for the use of State and local governments.  28 C.F.R. § 35.151(a) and (b).  Privately owned facilities that are covered or exempted from coverage under the Fair Housing Act are expressly excluded from the Americans with Disabilities Act.  42 U.S.C. § 12181 (2).

[131]  24 C.F.R.  § 8.22 (b).

[132]  24 C.F.R. § 8.3.

[133]  Section 106.5.

[134]  As discussed in Chapter 6.16, entities subject to the HUD regulations are required to comply with the scoping requirements in those regulations for new construction and alterations.

[135]  See Chapter 2.5 for a discussion of the general requirements for alterations to primary function areas.

[136]  HUD’s Office of Public and Indian Housing interprets section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act as applied to its programs to require all bedroom and bathrooms in dwelling units with mobility features to be on an accessible route.  Notice PIH 2002-01 (HA), “Accessibility Notice: Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973; the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990; the Architectural Barriers Act of 1968; and the Fair Housing Act of 1988,” January 22, 2002, at 7.

[137]  HUD has published a guide that shows examples of “flats” that provide all spaces and elements on a single floor.  Strategies for Providing Accessibility and Visitability for HOPE VI and Mixed Finance Homeownership (http://www.huduser.org/Publications/pdf/strategies.pdf).

[138]  The final revised guidelines also add new exceptions for certain elements to the scoping requirement for operable parts, which are discussed in Chapters 5.2.

[139]  65 FR 58974 (October 3, 2000).

[140]  The final revised guidelines also change the technical requirements for handrails, which are discussed in Chapter 5.22.

[141]  The final revised guidelines also revise the scoping requirements for assistive listening systems, which are discussed in Chapter 5.17.

[142]  Banks that entered into settlement agreements include:  Bank of America, Bank One, Chase Manhattan, Chevy Chase Bank, Chittenden Bank of Vermont, Citibank, First Union, Fleet Bank, Sovereign, Union Bank, and Wells Fargo.

[143]  Fare machines are not required to comply with the privacy requirements.  Currently available fare machines meet the other technical requirements in the final revised guidelines.

[144]  65 FR 58974 (October 3, 2000).

[145]  The final revised guidelines also revise the scoping requirements for wheelchair spaces in assembly areas, and add specific scoping and technical requirements for dispersion of wheelchair spaces and lines of sight in assembly areas, which are discussed in Chapters 5.18 and 6.14, respectively.

[146]  As discussed in Chapter 4.2, the proposed rule would have increased the scoping requirement for hotel guest rooms with communication features, but the final revised guidelines make no change from the current guidelines with respect to the number of hotel guest rooms required to provide communication features. 

[147]  Building fire alarm systems are required to have secondary or standby power sources in the event that the building power source goes out in emergencies.

[148]  Section 4-4.4.3.1 of NFPA 72 (1999 edition); section 7.5.4.4.1 of NFPA 72 (2002 edition).  The NFPA 72 permits in-room smoke alarms to be connected to the building fire alarm system.  Section 8-2(5) of NFPA 72 (1999 edition); section 11.9(5) of NFPA 72 (2002).  In-room smoke alarms notify occupants of a smoky condition within the room and are not usually connected to the building fire alarm system.  Audible alarms are provided outside the room to notify occupants of fire or other emergency conditions in other parts of the building.  Connecting in-room smoke alarms with visible notification appliances to the building fire alarm system, allows occupants of these rooms to be notified of both a smoky condition within the room, and fire and other emergency conditions in other parts of the building when the building fire alarm system is activated.

[149]  See Chapter 2.0 for a discussion of State adoption of the model building codes and fire and life safety codes.  The requirements for in-room smoke alarms and visible notification devices in hotels are contained in: sections 9.6.2.10 and 28.3.4.3 of the NFPA 101, Life Safety Code (2003 edition); sections 13.7.1.4 and 13.7.2.9 of the NFPA 1, Uniform Fire Code (2003 edition); and sections 907.2, 907.2.8, 9.7.2.10, and 907.10 of the International Fire Code (2003 edition).

[150]  Where requirements or exceptions in the International Building Code or the ICC/ANSI A117.1 standard are broader or narrower than the final revised guidelines, they are referred to as “similar” rather than “equivalent” to the final revised guidelines.

[151]  Except for van accessible parking spaces, the cost estimates were prepared by a professional construction cost estimator using standard industry procedures.  The cost estimator’s report is included in the rulemaking docket. 

[152]  See Chapter 2.5 for a discussion of the general requirements and the technical infeasibility exception that apply to alterations of existing facilities.

 

[153]  For purposes of this assessment, it is assumed that the “path of travel” serving the primary function area is not accessible.  As discussed in Chapter 2.5, the Department of Justice and Department of Transportation will address what an entity’s obligations are when the “path of  travel” serving an altered primary function area meets earlier standards, and the revised standards establish new or different requirements.

[154]  Portable stairs may be used to temporarily connect the seating area and the stage. Where portable stairs are used, the guidelines do not apply.

[155]  The final revised guidelines also add a new technical requirement for power operated doors on platform lifts, which is discussed in Chapter 7.9.

[156]   The current guidelines and the final revised guidelines similarly limit the places where platform lifts are allowed in new construction.  ADAAG 4.1.3 (5) Exception 4 (a) through (d); sections 206.7.1 through 206.7.10 of the final revised guidelines.

[157]  Section 701.11 (A) of  the NFPA 70, National Electric Code (2000 edition) requires storage batteries used as a source of power for emergency systems to be of suitable rating and capacity to supply and maintain the total load for at least 90 minutes, without the voltage applied to the load falling below 87 ½ percent of normal. 

[158]  See Chapter 6.7 for a discussion of accessible means of egress.

[159]  The final revised guidelines also add new exceptions for certain parking spaces to the scoping requirements for parking spaces, which are discussed in Chapter 5.9.

[160]  There is no change in the total number of accessible parking spaces required in the current guidelines and the final revised guidelines.  ADAAG 4.1.2 (5) (a); section 208.2 of the final revised guidelines.

[161]  Facilities with 200 or fewer parking spaces are required to provide one van accessible parking space under the current guidelines and the final revised guidelines.  Facilities with 201 to 400 parking spaces are required to provide one van accessible parking space under the current guidelines, and two van accessible parking spaces under the final revised guidelines.  Facilities with 401 to 600 parking spaces are required to provide two van accessible parking spaces under the current guidelines and the final revised guidelines.

[162]  Facilities with 601 parking spaces are required to provide two van accessible parking space under the current guidelines, and three van accessible parking spaces under the final revised guidelines.  Facilities with 3200 parking spaces are required to provide six van accessible parking space under the current guidelines, and seven van accessible parking spaces under the final revised guidelines.

[163]   The cost estimates for van accessible parking spaces are based on a report prepared by the State of Maryland. Maryland requires one in every four accessible parking spaces to be van accessible.  Parking spaces are typically 18 feet long.  Widening an access aisle by 3 feet occupies 54 square feet.  A parking facility with 600 parking spaces occupies a minimum of 100,000 square feet.  If a parking facility does not have sufficient space for widening an access aisle by 54 square feet, the facility can either provide one less parking space or increase the size of the facility.  The estimated average cost for paving an additional 54 square feet of a parking facility is $271 (7 square yards of paving at $2.64 per square yard for materials, and $2.50 per square yard for labor).  The estimated average cost for striping an additional 54 square feet of access aisle is $73 (96 linear feet of striping at $0.26 per linear foot for materials, and $0.50 per linear foot for labor).

[164]  Department of Justice, ADA Business Briefs: Restriping Parking Lots (www.usdoj.gov/crt/ada/restribr.htm).

 

[165]  28 C.F.R. § 36.403 (e) (1) and (2).

[166]  28 C.F.R. § 36.403 (e) (3) and (f) (2) (ii).

[167]  The final revised guidelines also revise the scoping and technical requirements for volume-control telephones, which are discussed in Chapters 6.9.

[168]  28 C.F.R.  § 36.403 (e) (3) and (f) (2) (iii). 

[169]  Some casement windows may meet the technical requirements for operable parts.  However, casement windows cost about three times more than sliding or double hung windows before contractor markups.  If casement windows are used, it is likely they will be provided throughout the facility.  Automatic electric window operators are also available, but cost considerably more than adding hardware to a window.

[170]  Building codes and fire and life safety codes require egress doors to swing in the direction of travel where serving an occupant load of 50 or more persons.  Out-swinging doors that are approached from the front and that do not have both a closer and latch do not have to provide any maneuvering clearance parallel to the doorway.   Automatic doors usually do not have latches.  Building codes and fire and life safety codes also require horizontal sliding doors to have standby power. 

[171]  Section 701.11 (A) of the NFPA 70, National Electric Code (2000 edition) requires storage batteries used as a source of power for emergency systems to be of suitable rating and capacity to supply and maintain the total load for at least 90 minutes, without the voltage applied to the load falling below 87 ½ percent of normal

[172]  See Chapter 6.7 for a discussion of accessible means of egress.

[173]  The final revised guidelines also add a new technical requirement for standby power for platform lifts that are part of an accessible means of egress, which is discussed in Chapter 7.2.

[174]  The final revised guidelines also add new exceptions for toilet room doors overlapping fixture clearances and revise the technical requirements for the water closet location and rear grab bar, which are discussed in Chapters 5.23 and 5.24, respectively.

[175]  The additional area results from increasing the minimum width of the water closet clearance by 12 inches (from 48 to 60 inches) for the full minimum length of the clearance (56 inches), plus an additional 12 inches width to move the lavatory out of the water closet clearance.

[176]  See Chapter 5.23 for a discussion of the new exception permitting toilet room doors to overlap fixture clearances.

[177]  Section 7.28.A4 of the “Guidelines for the Design and Construction of Hospital and Health Care Facilities” (2001 edition) provides that:

“[R]ooms that contain . . . water closets for in-patient use shall be equipped with doors and hardware permitting emergency access from the outside.  When such rooms have only one opening or are small, the doors shall open outward or in a manner that will avoid pressing a patient who may have collapsed within the room.”

The guidelines were developed by the American Institute of Architects and the Facilities Guidelines Institute, with assistance from the Department of Health and Human Services.  The Joint Commission for the Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations and 42 States reference the guidelines.  As discussed in Chapter 5.19, the final revised guidelines exempt toilet rooms serving critical or intensive care patient sleeping rooms.

[178]   28 C.F.R. § 36.403 (e) (3) and (f) (2) (ii).

[179]  Section 202.4 Exception.

 

[180]   28 C.F.R. § 36.403 (e) (3) and (f) (2) (ii).

[181]  Changing the design of the kitchen to an “L-shape” open to an adjacent dining or living area would be an alternative.  Because of the “dead” corner created by the intersection of the “L,” the total length of the cabinets and counters would need to be increased from the “galley” layout to provide equivalent usable space.

[182]  Section 202.4 Exception.

[183]  See Chapter 6.16 for a discussion of the scoping requirement for dwelling units with communication features.

[184]  See Chapter 6.16 for a discussion of the scoping requirements for new construction of Federal, State, and local government housing.

[185]  Section 202.4 Exception.

[186]  For Federal, State and local government housing, the Dodge Construction Potentials Bulletin only reports the total value of construction projects.

[187]  The industry sources used include the Building Owners and Managers Association International; the American Hotel and Lodging Association; the American Hospital Association;  Cushman & Wakefield, a real estate services firm; Lodging Econometrics, a market research firm; and Modern Healthcare, a news weekly for the hospital industry.

[188]  Equivalent requirements contained in Appendix E to the International Building Code are not included in estimating the lower bound of the range of national costs because State and local governments must specifically reference Appendix E when adopting the International Building Code for the requirements to be mandatory, and all the State and local governments that adopt the International Building Code may not specifically reference Appendix E.

[189]  Office building construction varies from year to year.  A market forecast prepared by FMI Corporation predicts that office building construction will decline by 10 percent in 2003 and increase by 4 percent to 7 percent a year in 2004 through 2007.  FMI Construction Outlook – Second Quarter 2003.

[190]  Cushman & Wakefield, Market Beat Snapshot, United States Second Quarter 2003, Office Overview.  The report tracks new construction of office buildings containing more than 25,000 square feet.

[191]  See Chapter 7.3 for additional discussion of the requirements for van accessible parking spaces.

[192]  See Chapter 7.4 for additional discussion of the requirements for ambulatory accessible toilet compartments.

[193]  See Chapter 7.5 for additional discussion of the requirements for public TTYs.

[194]  See Chapter 7.7 for additional discussion of the requirements for two-way communication systems.

[195]  See Chapter 7.10 for additional discussion of the requirements for water closet clearance.

[196]  See Chapter 7.12 for additional discussion of the requirements for galley kitchen clearance.

[197]  Hotel construction varies from year to year.  A market forecast prepared by FMI Corporation estimates that hotel construction will decline by 9 percent in 2003 and increase by 4 percent to 7 percent a year in 2004 through 2007.  FMI Construction Outlook – Second Quarter 2003.

[198]  Lodging Econometrics, News Release, July 16, 2003.

[199]  The range of construction costs was provided by Lodging Econometrics.

[200]  Average number of guest rooms in hotels for each size group completed in 2001 and 2002 was provided by Lodging Econometrics.

[201]  See Chapter 7.3 for additional discussion of the requirements for van accessible parking spaces.

[202]  See Chapter 7.4 for additional discussion of the requirements for ambulatory accessible toilet compartments.

[203]  See Chapter 7.5 for additional discussion of the requirements for public TTYs.

[204]  See Chapter 7.6 for additional discussion of the requirements for operable windows.

[205]  See Chapter 7.10 for additional discussion of the requirements for water closet clearance.

[206]  See Chapter 7.11 for additional discussion of the requirements for shower spray controls.

[207]  See Chapter 7.12 for additional discussion of the requirements for galley kitchen clearance.

[208]  See Chapter 7.13 for additional discussion of the requirements for vanity counter space.

[209]  Hospital and nursing home construction varies from year to year.  A market forecast prepared by FMI Corporation estimates that hospital and nursing home construction will decline by 1 percent to 5 percent a year in 2003 through 2005, be static in 2006, and increase by 8 percent a year in 2007.  FMI Construction Outlook – Second Quarter 2003.  The Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services estimates that hospital construction will increase by 6 percent to 7 percent a year in 2004 through 2011.

[210]  See Chapter 7.3 for additional discussion of the requirements for van accessible parking spaces.

[211]  See Chapter 7.4 for additional discussion of the requirements for ambulatory accessible toilet compartments.

[212]  See Chapter 7.5 for additional discussion of the requirements for public TTYs.

[213]  See Chapter 7.5 for additional discussion of the requirements for public TTYs.

[214]  See Chapter 7.6 for additional discussion of the requirements for operable windows.

[215]  See Chapter 7.10 for additional discussion of the requirements for water closet clearance.

[216]  See Chapter 7.11 for additional discussion of the requirements for shower spray controls.

[217]  See Chapters 6.16 and 6.17 for a discussion of the scoping requirements for new construction and alterations to Federal, State, and local government housing.  The Department of Justice may further address the types of facilities that are subject to the requirements for dwelling units when it adopts the final revised guidelines as accessibility standards.  The Department of Justice is responsible for assessing the impacts of subjecting other facilities to the requirements for dwelling units. 

[218]  Residential construction varies from year to year.  A market forecast prepared by FMI Corporation estimates that residential construction will decline by 1 percent to 3 percent a year in 2003 and 2004, and increase by 6 percent to 7 percent a year in 2005 through 2007.  FMI Construction Outlook – Second Quarter 2003.

[219]  Construction projects are identified as private or government based on who owns the project during the construction phase.

[220]  The data for the Federal government does not separately show the value of work done on single family and multi-family residential facilities.

[221]  The floor area calculations include space within the units and common areas.

[222]  The Department of Housing and Urban Development reports that the average cost of constructing a dwelling unit is $80,000 for its HOME program, and $120,000 for its HOPE VI program.  Statement of The Honorable Mel Martinez before the U.S. House Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on Veterans Affairs, Housing, and Urban Development, and Independent Agencies, March 19, 2003.

[223]  See Chapter 6.17 for discussion of the alterations requirements for dwelling units.

[224]  See Chapter 7.10 for additional discussion of the requirements for water closet clearance.

[225]  See Chapter 7.11 for additional discussion of the requirements for shower spray controls.

[226]  See Chapter 7.12 for additional discussion of the requirements for galley kitchen clearance.

[227]  See Chapter 7.14 for additional discussion of the requirements for dwelling units with communication features.

[228]  As discussed in Chapter 9, the final revised guidelines will also affect facilities leased by the Federal government.  The United States Postal Service estimates that it will cost $15.3 million annually to alter leased postal facilities to comply with the final revised guidelines. 

[229]  42 U.S.C. § 4151(2).  When initially enacted in 1968, the Architectural Barriers Act required only facilities leased “after construction or alteration in accordance with plans and specifications of the United States” to be accessible.  Section 1 of Public Law 90-480.   The law was amended in 1977 to apply to “every lease entered into on or after January 1, 1977, including any renewal of a lease entered into before such date which renewal is on or after such date.”  Section 202 of Public Law 94-451. 

[230]  51 FR 13122 (April 17, 1986).  The standards for leased facilities are contained in section 4.1.8 of USPS Handbook RE-4, Standards for Facility Accessibility.

[231]  The estimates were initially prepared by the USPS’ Facilities Service Offices.  A professional cost estimating firm reviewed the data and adjusted some of the estimates.  The estimates include engineering and design costs, materials, labor, small job premium, contractor overhead and profit, and contingency for general conditions.  The survey also attempted to estimate the staff time involved in inspecting the facilities, negotiating with landlords, and administering the alterations projects.  The staff time estimates ranged from 7 days for a 20,000 square feet facility that needed alterations costing $15,742, to 28 days for a 2,664 square feet facility that needed alterations costing $13,451.  The facilities apportioned the staff costs between the USPS’ current standards and the final revised guidelines based on how the costs for the alterations projects were assigned and added the staff costs to the total project costs.

[232]  One facility, a 1,440 square feet modular unit that has been occupied since 2000, did not require any alterations to comply with the final revised guidelines.  The facility will have to provide a ramp at an exit door in the employee area.  The costs for this alteration were assigned to the USPS’ current standards.

[233]  Section F202.6 of the final revised guidelines.  New leases for postal facilities in buildings already occupied by the USPS are typically for a term of five years, and may include a renewal option for five years.  The lease term for new postal facilities that are constructed to the USPS’ specifications is typically 15 or 20 years, with one or two renewal options for five years.  The lease term for a postal facility in an existing building that is substantially altered to the USPS’ specifications is typically 10 years, with one or two renewal options for five years.

[234]  Major alterations projects have costs in excess of $100,000.

[235]  Sections F202.6.5.6 and F227.3 of the final revised guidelines.

[236]  Section 904.4.1 of the final revised guidelines.

[237]  Section 904.4 Exception of the final revised guidelines.

[238]  Section 904.4.2 of the final revised guidelines.

[239]  The USPS current standards require a 48 inch clear width in front of customer service counters in newly constructed and altered facilities.  Section 9.2 of USPS Handbook RE-4.  UFAS 7.2 currently requires a portion of customer service counters to be between 28 inches to 34 inches above the floor.  However, the USPS’ current standards do not reference this provision.

[240]  Sections F202.6.4 and F208.2.4 of the final revised guidelines.

[241]  The USPS’ current standards count van accessible parking spaces toward meeting the minimum required number of accessible parking spaces in newly constructed and altered facilities, but do not require a portion of accessible parking spaces to be van accessible.  Section 4.1.1 (5) (c) of USPS Handbook RE-4.

[242]  An accessible parking space and access aisle is 13 feet wide.  A van accessible parking space and access aisle is 16 feet wide.  Sections 502.2 and 502.3 of the final revised guidelines.

[243]  One facility estimated the total costs for providing a van accessible parking space to be $1,925, but did not show how much was for restriping parking spaces and how much was for a sign to identify the van accessible parking space.  The other six facilities reported that their accessible parking spaces are van accessible, and did not estimate any costs for restriping the parking spaces.  Five of the facilities provided photos of their accessible parking spaces, and the photos show that the parking spaces will have to be restriped to be van accessible.

[244]  Some of the facilities included the costs of painting the International Symbol of Accessibility on the pavement of the van accessible parking space in the estimates.  The final revised guidelines do not contain such a requirement.  The Sweets Facilities Cost Guide 2003 estimates the material and labor costs for painting pavement lines marking parking spaces to be $0.16 per linear foot, or $7.75 per parking space (Pavement Markings 02580.10).  The estimate is based on a parking space that is 8 feet wide and 20 feet long.  Marking a van accessible parking space should cost about twice this amount.  The estimate does not include painting over existing pavement markings.  The State of Maryland estimated the additional costs for striping a van accessible parking space to be $73 when it recently revised its accessibility code to require one in every four accessible parking spaces to be van accessible.  This estimate is used elsewhere in this assessment.

[245]  The USPS’ current standards require accessible parking spaces to be level.  Sections 4.1.8 (2) (c) and 4.6.3 of USPS Handbook RE-4.  One facility estimated the costs for repaving and restriping the parking spaces to be $2,450, and assigned $2,000 to the USPS’ current standards and $450 to the final revised guidelines.

[246]  Section 502.6 of the final revised guidelines.  Exception 1 to section F216.5 of the final revised guidelines adds a new exception that does not require a sign where four or fewer parking spaces, including accessible parking spaces, are provided. 

[247]  Two facilities estimated the total costs for providing a van accessible parking space to be $957 and $1,925, but did not show how much was for restriping parking spaces and how much was for a sign to identify the van accessible parking space.  One facility did not include the cost for a sign in its estimate for providing a van accessible parking space.  The other two facilities reported that their accessible parking spaces are van accessible, and did not estimate any costs for signs to identify the parking spaces as van accessible.  The facilities provided photos of their accessible parking spaces, and the photos do not show that the signs include the words “van accessible.”

[248]  One facility estimated the costs for providing a sign to identify a van accessible parking space to be $708, but did not indicate whether the sign is wall or pole mounted.  The Sweets Facilities Cost Guide 2003 estimates the material and labor costs for providing a sign to identify an accessible parking space to be $45.75 (Signage 02840.60).  The State of Maryland estimated the costs for providing a sign to identify a van accessible parking space to be $50 when it recently revised its accessibility code to require one in every four accessible parking spaces to be van accessible.  This estimate is used elsewhere in this assessment.

[249]  Sections F202.6.5.7, F228.1, 308.2.1, and 308.3.1 of the final revised guidelines.

[250]  The USPS’ current standards require parcel post depositories, stamp machines, and change machines in newly constructed and altered facilities to be installed so that the operating mechanisms are 48 inches maximum for an unobstructed high forward reach and 54 inches maximum for an unobstructed high side reach.  Sections 4.2.5, 4.2.6, and 9.3 of USPS Handbook RE-4.  Existing elements that comply with USPS’ current standards are not required to comply with the final revised guidelines unless altered.   Section F203.2 of the final revised guidelines.

[251]  Sections 4.1.8 (1) (a) (i) and 4.1.8 (2) (a) of USPS Manual RE-4.

[252]  Another facility provided a photo of its parking access aisle that showed a built-up curb ramp in the access aisle, but did not identify the curb ramp as needing to be replaced.

[253]  Sections 4.1.8 (2) (c) and 4.6.3 of USPS Manual RE-4.

[254]  Section 406.5 of the final revised guidelines.

[255]  Section 9.4 of USPS Handbook RE-4.

[256]  Sections F202.6.5.7, F228.2, 308.2.1, 308.3.1, and 309.3 of the final revised guidelines.  If the post office boxes comply with USPS’ current standards, they are not required to comply with the final revised guidelines unless altered.   Section F203.2 of the final revised guidelines.

[257]  Sections 9.2, 4.32.3, and 4.32.4 of USPS Handbook RE-4. 

[258]  Sections F202.6.5.4, F226.1, 902.2, and 902.3 of the final revised guidelines.

[259]  Door closers are adjustable, and do not need to be replaced.   The USPS’ current standards require door closers to be adjusted so that from an open position of 70 degrees, the door will take at least 3 seconds to move to a point 3 inches from the latch.  Section 4.13.10 of USPS Handbook RE-4.  The final revised guidelines require door closers to be adjusted so that from an open position of 90 degrees, the door will take at least 5 seconds to move to a position 12 degrees from the latch.  Section 404.2.8.1 of the final revised guidelines.  If the door closers comply with USPS’ current standards, they are not required to comply with the final revised guidelines unless the doors are altered.   Section F203.2 of the final revised guidelines. 

[260]  Section 4.1.8 (1) (a) (ii) of USPS Handbook RE-4.  The USPS’ current standards also allow alternate technical requirements for alterations to certain elements and spaces to apply to employee areas in leased facilities. 

[261]  Sections 4.1.6 (3) (a) to (c) of USPS Handbook RE-4. 

[262]  Exception to Sections 4.1.6 (3) (d) of USPS Handbook RE-4.

[263]  Section F202.6.2 of the final revised guidelines.

[264]  Sections F202.6.3, F202.6.4, and F202.6.5 of the final revised guidelines.  An exception to section    F202.6.5.2 exempts fire alarms in leased facilities from accessibility requirements where existing power sources must be upgraded to meet the requirements.

[265]  Six facilities surveyed by the Great Lakes Facilities Service Office and three facilities surveyed by the Western Facilities Service Office did not complete the employee areas part of the survey.

[266]  The Small Business Administration has established size standards for entities to be considered small entities.  13 C.F.R. § 121.201.  The size standards for the entities that construct or alter facilities analyzed in Chapter 8 of this assessment are:  $6 million annual receipts for hotels; $29 million annual receipts for hospitals; and $11.5 million annual receipts for nursing homes.  For office buildings, the size standards will vary depending on the economic activity or industry engaged in by the entity that constructs or alters the facility.  Local governments are considered small entities if they have a population of less than 50,000.  5 U.S.C. § 601(5).

[267]  Regulatory Assessment of Americans with Disabilities Act and Architectural Barriers Act Accessibility Guidelines (August 19, 1999).

[268]  64 FR 62284 (November 16, 1999).

[269]  The Small Business Administration stated its objections in letters to the Access Board dated May 12, 2000, and September 6, 2002.

[270]  See Chapter 2.0 for a discussion of State adoption of the International Building Code.

[271]  For Federal. State, and local government housing, the revisions are compared to UFAS.

[272]  See Chapter 2.3 for a discussion of the general scoping requirements and technical infeasibility exception that apply to alterations of existing facilities.

[273]  Section 101.2 of the final revised guidelines.