Sometimes it is just impossible to bring your location into compliance. Some of those factors include the practicability of bringing your location to ADA compliance, your financial situation, the physical universe that your location occupies and so on.
The readily achievable standard is a factor-based test that looks into a number of areas. In fact, parking lot striping and signs are the number one most common complaints in ADA lawsuits. However, certain things are almost always “readily achievable” – such as: putting up the proper signs, properly striping your parking lot to provide accessible parking, leveling out minor slopes, and placing dispensers at the proper height. “Readily achievable” is a slippery legal term and you should get the advice of a knowledgeable lawyer to help you determine what you must do and what you can let go. I other words, regardless of when or how your facility was built, you must do everything that is “readily achievable” to make your facility accessible or you will eventually face a lawsuit alleging that you discriminated against disabled people under the ADA and related state laws. The ADA allows buildings with that were built before the updated ADA regulations to be grandfathered in as long as the deficiency is not readily achievable. This is what most people think of as “grandfathering.” But the ADA’s clause does not actually allow this.
The first misconception about the ADA is that, if your facility was either compliant or otherwise acceptable when it was built, that you need do nothing about making it accessible under ADA standards now. Entrepreneurs should keep in mind that the city permit and inspection process gives little to no insight into whether your facility is “accessible” under the federal rules of the ADA and the ADAAG guidelines. City permits and inspectors are concerned with local law, so they will often certify or permit architectural features that are acceptable under local law, but are actually prohibited by the ADA. However, the ADA is a federal law and, under the Constitution, it trumps local California laws. Making sure your facility qualifies for “grandfathering” often saves lots of money in renovations and construction. While the ADA has such a clause, it is neither as extensive or as protective as the ones they are used to.īusinesses usually meet this kind of exception to the law when they work with the local city building codes and inspectors. One of the most common questions from businesses sued under the American’s with Disabilities Act (ADA) in California is whether they are protected by a “grandfather clause.” Generally, such clauses in the law protect an existing building or facility from complying with new rules made after they were built.
0 kommentar(er)
