|
1
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
3
|
- Why are we still having problems¡¦. what¡¯s so different about
accessibility ?
- History of Laws & Rules that got us here
- What¡¯s been done to educate code enforcement people & what can we do
to get better?
- Changing our perspective & finding the most efficient &effective
way to access a building
|
|
4
|
- A building is designed and its facilities are constructed based on three
primary influences:
- How the owner/client describes their intention for the way the building
will be used & how much money is dedicated to its construction
- The educational background & professional experience of the
designer
- Other influences like :
- Contractors who make recommendations to the owner on material choices
and methods for accomplishing the design objectives
- Building & zoning
codes and other regulations that affect building design
- Unless the building is intended specifically for medical or other care
services, the owner generally will not specifically think about
barrier-free design.
So¡¦¡¦¡¦¡¦¡¦¡¦¡¦¡¦¡¦.
|
|
5
|
- That leaves it up to the designer and ¡°other influences¡± to assure that
the construction design satisfies the requirements in codes and other
regulations. Although it
would seem the designer should understand and apply the code
requirements, we have to be fair, there are an enormous number of code
provisions and standards that apply to facilities.
- In the typical university or college program required for engineers or
architects, how many courses or how much classtime do you think is
devoted to teaching a designer how to use the code?
- four classes, 16 credit hours two classes, 8 credit hours
- one class, 3 or 4 credit hours less than one course
- How much classtime do you think is devoted to teaching a designer about
accessibility or barrier-free requirements?
- one course part of one course an elective course zero
- Although the design firms who hire the graduates help ¡°fill in the
blanks¡±, for the most part,
most designers learn to comply with regulations by:
- studying at home attending night classes
- attending classes offered by building officials¡¯ associations
- having plans rejected when applying for permits
|
|
6
|
- This places a significant responsibility on code enforcement
professionals. They are the
¡°other influence¡± and last in the chain to make sure the built
environment meets society¡¯s expectations. Unfortunately, there is no
national or state system for preparing this profession for this
overwhelming task. New
building officials, plans examiners and inspectors are tested to
determine if they can cross reference the code and then sent out to
assure that a level of heath and safety is maintained for the public.
- No one can be totally prepared entering a new code enforcement position
so we naturally focus on what others in the profession identify as
priorities and those areas that we are experienced in.
- Understandably, fire & electrical safety, structural integrity,
exiting, air quality & sanitation are priorities and these areas
become the code enforcement professional¡¯s focus when further training
is planned.
- So where does accessibility or barrier-free design fit in these
traditional priority groups?
- Is it a electrical safety issue? Structural Fire Protection
- Egress/Exiting Air Quality/Mechanical Health issue?
- Water Supply/Sanitation Is it an energy conservation issue?
|
|
7
|
|
|
8
|
- Accessible design criteria is in the code, in state and federal laws but
it is the only area of the building code that relates specifically to
the needs of building users.
- Our perspective, as code enforcement professionals, is focussed on
safety & health (which doesn¡¯t include accessibility) so, we¡¯ll have
to learn to add a new perspective.
|
|
9
|
- Rehabilitation Act of 1968/73 (a promise)
- Federal funding - HUD programs (202), schools, etc.
- Uniform Federal Accessibility Standard (UFAS) ¡®84
- Ohio Law - 1973/80
- Publicly owned buildings, ANSI A117.1-1961
- ¡°Public accommodations¡± except
- Residential, or
- Commercial Establishments <10,000sqft
- ANSI A117.1-1980/86
|
|
10
|
- Fair Housing Amendments Act - 1988
- Expanded protected classes in US Civil Rights Law
- Adaptable Access required for multi-family dwellings
- Americans with Disabilities Act - 1990 (eff. ¡¯92)
- Titles for Employment, Public entities/government, Services available
to the public, Transportation & Communications
- New Construction of Public Accommodations required to be accessible
|
|
11
|
- Ohio Civil Rights Law - 1992 (HB 321)
- Expanded Civil Rights Commission responsibility
- Penalties for parking in reserved spaces
- Building Code rules to require accessibility
- In accordance with ADA & FHAA but limited to extent of Board of
Building Standards authority
|
|
12
|
- US Department of Justice (DOJ) enforces ADA
- With some help from advocates
- No responsibility is placed
on state or local jurisdictions to enforce the ADA ¡¦only to comply
- Employers, owners, business operators, corporations, etc. must comply
- HUD enforces FHAA with help from US DOJ
- First level of administrative enforcement process is through the Ohio
Civil Rights Commission
- Designers & Contractors must comply
|
|
13
|
- With some help from advocates
- No responsibility is placed
on state or local jurisdictions to enforce the ADA ¡¦only to comply
- Employers, owners, business operators, corporations, etc. must comply
|
|
14
|
- First level of administrative enforcement process is through the Ohio
Civil Rights Commission
- Building Owners, Designers & Contractors must comply
|
|
15
|
- Building Officials enforce OBBC (building code)
- Owners & their agents (designers) must comply
- Plans examiners review plans for compliance with the OBBC which includes
the referenced standards
- Inspectors determine if the construction matches the approved drawings,
look for serious hazards, etc. - (but they are not supposed to forget
to check accessibility)
- The owner has the right to build in accordance with the approved plans,
however¡¦¡¦...
- The Ohio Board of Building Standards processes complaints of inadequate
code enforcement
|
|
16
|
- There¡¯s a lot of input out there
- Access Board, local advocates, attorneys, ¡°experts¡± consultants, ¡°he said/she said¡±, regional
technical assistance organizations, recommended practices, old laws,
personal bias, preferred compliance solutions, buddy down the
road¡¦¡¦¡¦¡¦¡¦¡¦
- Is the issue Ohio or Federal Law?
- OBBS rules, BBS Memos, technical experts who understand distinctions,
seminars
- US Department of Justice
(800) 514-0301
|
|
17
|
- 4101:2-1-03(C) OBBC ¡°Where differences occur between provisions of this
code and referenced standards listed in Chapters 35, 51 and 69 of the
OBBC, the provisions of this code shall apply.¡±
|
|
18
|
- Section 1001.4 OBBC: ¡°Where
differences occur between the provisions of this chapter and ¡°ADAAG¡± and
¡°FHAG¡± listed in ¡°Chapter 35, Referenced Standards,¡± for means of egress
required to be accessible, the provisions of ¡°ADAAG¡± shall apply.¡±
|
|
19
|
- As they say, a picture is worth a thousand words. The following pages
are examples of conditions where competent designers, plans examiners
and inspectors worked together and the results looked good. The question has to be asked:
¡°Did the end result really meet the intention in the code and does it
satisfy the users needs?¡±
|
|
20
|
|
|
21
|
|
|
22
|
|
|
23
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
25
|
|
|
26
|
|
|
27
|
|
|
28
|
|
|
29
|
|
|
30
|
|
|
31
|
|
|
32
|
|
|
33
|
|
|
34
|
- If we want to:
- Provide access without
barriers
- Minimize costs
- Maintain or improve
architectural/environmental conditions
- Minimize difficulty for
users
|
|
35
|
- We will solve simple elevation (level) conditions by using:
- Walks with slopes 1:20 or
less
|
|
36
|
|
|
37
|
|
|
38
|
|
|
39
|
|
|
40
|
|
|
41
|
|
|
42
|
|
|
43
|
|
|
44
|
|