I’ve responsibility for training enforcement of GA Accessibility Code, which basically aligns with the ADA. I am occasionally being challenged with reluctant enforcement of an alteration’s path of travel obligation. This appears to be due to the complexity of defining an alteration’s (usable) costs and no clear responsible party other than the owner because of its uniqueness. Specifically this is not a normal cost calculation for a design professional or construction contractor. Has your experience brought you in contact with an attitude, process or tool in use in any private organization, or federal, state or local authority that simply explains these concepts and the importance of improving access in existing buildings without compliant access in an alteration?

April 27, 2016 by Brad Gaskins

— Steven J.

ANSWER:

We have not seen any tool to help with this analysis. What we have seen is it is usually up to the owner to do the accounting. As is with readily achievable, it is the plaintiff that must prove that it is not readily achievable, we would expect that that it would be the same.

The one thing that owners must realize. There is STILL an ongoing barrier removal requirement so just because they meet the 20% disproportionality does not mean that they don’t have to continue removing barriers. So as soon as the alteration is done, any barriers that they did not remove as part of the alteration still have to be removed. The question that remains is when.

– Brad