Any person or entity involved in the design and construction of an apartment or condominium building, and the owner of the building, may be named as Defendants, sued, and held liable for violations of the Fair Housing Act or Americans with Disabilities Act at the facility in a HUD lawsuit.
Read MoreHUD is not required to review or approve builder's plans or issue certifications of compliance with the Fair Housing Act's design and construction requirements for multi-family housing. The burden of compliance rests with the person or persons who design and construct covered multifamily dwellings.
Read MoreIf a builder, architect, or developer believe that a property with which they were involved is covered by the Fair Housing Act's design and construction requirements but does not comply, they should seek technical assistance from a consultant with expertise in the Fair Housing Act's design and construction requirements about a plan to correct the violations.
Read MoreAlterations, rehabilitation, or repair of covered multifamily dwellings are not covered by the FHA because the Act's design and construction requirements only apply to new construction of buildings built for first occupancy after March 13, 1991.
Read MoreA minimum of two percent of the number of parking spaces serving covered dwelling units [apartments or condominiums] must be made accessible and they must be located on an accessible route; if different types of parking are offered, such as surface parking, garage, or covered spaces, a sufficient number of each type must be made accessible.
Read MoreThe Fair Housing Act does not require fully accessible apartments.
Read MoreThe Fair Housing Act's design and construction requirements do not require a minimum number of accessible dwelling units.
Read MoreThe Fair Housing Act's design and construction requirements do not cover multistory townhouses--units that have two, three, or even four stories--unless the building has an elevator.
Read MoreHUD recognizes 15 safe harbors to meet FHA regulations to provide a range of options that—if followed in their entirety without modification or waiver—will keep residential buildings compliant with the FHA. The new safe harbors are generally aligned with the current codes (minus any local amendments to the IBC), which may make it less complicated by limiting the layers of the requirements. HUD recommends that only one safe harbor should be used for design and construction of a multi-family facility.
Read MoreThe Fair Housing Act (FHA) requires seven basic requirements that must be met to comply with the access requirements of the Act. To describe these requirements in more detail, HUD published FHA Guidelines in 1991. The FHA Guidelines are one of 15 safe harbors for compliance that HUD has identified.
Read MoreThe Fair Housing Act requires all "covered multifamily dwellings" designed and constructed for first occupancy after March 13, 1991 to be accessible to and usable by people with disabilities. Covered multifamily dwellings are all dwelling units in buildings containing four or more units with one or more elevators, and all ground floor units in buildings containing four or more units, without an elevator.
Read MoreThe Fair Housing Amendment Act of 1988 represented a major change in housing law. Congress delayed the effective date for the access provisions until 1991 to give developers, builders, and architects more time to incorporate the new access standards into their building plans. Richard Acree provides multi-family building and facility inspections for ADA and FHA compliance.
Read MoreMost golf course facilities must comply with the ADA, both within the boundary of the golf course and outside the boundary. The recreation guidelines for golf courses and 2010 ADA Standards provide specifications for elements within a golf course facility to create a general level of usability for individuals with disabilities. New construction or alterations of existing golf course facilities going forward should comply with the 2010 ADA Standards. Designers and operators are encouraged to exceed the 2010 ADA Standards where possible to provide increased accessibility and opportunities.
Read MoreGrab bars are not storage devices. Nothing should be stored or placed on the tops of grab bars to include towels, toilet paper rolls, air refresheners, etc. Grab bars must be installed so the top of the gripping surface is 33-36 inches above the finished floor. Hotels should train staff not to place anything on top of grab bars.
Read MoreThe ADA requires that employers provide reasonable accommodations to employees with disabilities, which may include telework, when it does not pose an undue hardship to the employer. WMSD denied the employee request without discussing it, or possible alternative accommodations, with the employee. WMSD was sued by DOJ for violation of ADA Title I.
Read MoreThis case serves as an important reminder that before entering into contracts for such equipment, businesses must consider whether the equipment is accessible to users with disabilities and, if not, whether there will be employees in the area to provide prompt assistance. And while some courts have held that prompt employee assistance can be provided at inaccessible self-service equipment to comply with the ADA, providing accessible self-service equipment mitigates risk of litigation.
Read MoreThis article is about an accessible route to an accessible entrance at a restaurant in FL where the entity went beyond the ADA. Going beyond the ADA is encouraged as long as an entity does not violate the ADA in the process. A passenger loading zone is covered in the 1991 ADA Standards and 2010 ADA Standards. Installations that are similar to a passenger loading zone should comply with the ADA Standards.
Read MoreChicago cannot contract away its Section 504 and Title II obligations. Section 504 and Title II cover all programs and activities of a public entity, and do not distinguish between a program provided directly by the public entity and a program provided through a contractual or other arrangement. Chicago has the ability and obligation to ensure that the private developers with whom it contracts provide housing that is both affordable and accessible to individuals with disabilities.
Read MoreThe US Department of Justice has filed a proposed consent decree with Barnet Dulaney Perkins Eye Centers (BDP) and American Vision Partners (AVP), to resolve its lawsuit alleging that the eye care practices violated the Americans with Disabilities Act. BDP and AVP have agreed to pay $1 million and end discriminatory policies towards people with disabilities.
Read More