Look, I’m not questioning the legality of the situation, I’m just commenting on the seeming absurdity-on the surface at least-of having a bunch of handicapped parking spaces (which btw were more than just painted spots, they are required to have posted signs in front as well) for an establishment that is not handicapped accessible. That’s all.
But it does come down to the legality of the situation. Well, the legality and money. Those upgrades cost money. Putting a ramp in costs money and if the owner isn’t required to do it they may opt not to, especially if it’s a small business.
Many of the things you/we take for granted are done because of the laws that are in place. It would be easier and cheaper to run electrical wires on the surface and if code didn’t require them to be in steel conduit they likely wouldn’t be. If food codes didn’t involve a ‘no bare hand contact’ rule, delis wouldn’t spend thousands of dollars a year on vinyl gloves. The gym’s jurisdiction didn’t require a ramp…and you don’t have one.
In some cases, even things that were grandfathered eventually become required. Someday the gym may be required to put a ramp in, but (like I said before) you may find other issues inside.
The city/state/fed/ADA needs to strike a balance between what should be done (in their opinion) and what can be done without putting people out of business. If the place has been around for years and years, they were probably required to put an HC spot in when they painted the parking lot. If they redo the front walk, they’ll probably have to take care of the step. If they redo their bathrooms they’ll have to bring them up to ADA compliance. If they remodel a major portion of the building, they’ll likely have to bring the whole thing up to code. But, for example, if the ADA came into a small business and told them they needed to do $100,000 worth of upgrades to make the place compliant, they may not be able to afford that and would have to close.
No, they are not. There is a whole set of design codes that must be met, as well as location, wheelchair ramps and minimum number of available space required for a given parking lot size or street availability.
Um. Ok. It still makes no practical sense to me.
I should clarify that what I meant was when you are restriping your lot it’s cheap to add a HC spots in the appropriate places. If a business with no HC spots (or stripes) is about to stripe the lot, the city will likely make them add the HC spots. If you add the cost of adding HC spots to the cost of restriping without them, I can’t imagine it’s that much more and the striping company will probably have a good idea as to what the jurisdiction requires.
Having said that, I don’t know if adding the actual spots will result in you having to redo asphalt grading or tear out and concrete and pour ramps where there were curbs before. I’m guessing that varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction and even down to the local inspector’s mood that day.
A lot of that may come down to what your city/state considers the “parking lot” and what they consider to be other parts of the property/improvement/entrance/walkways etc.
Looking at the links I see two things. From one link I see:
“When accessible parking spaces are added in an existing parking lot, locate the spaces on the most level ground close to the accessible entrance. An accessible route must always be provided from the accessible parking to the accessible entrance. An accessible route never has curbs or stairs, must be at least 3- feet wide, and has a firm, stable, slip-resistant surface. The slope along the accessible route should not be greater than 1:12 in the direction of travel.”
From the other:
“In alterations, applicable ADAAG requirements must be met except where it is “technically infeasible” to do so. For example, if the resurfacing of a lot does not include regrading, it may be technically infeasible to meet the maximum 1:50 surface slope requirement”
I haven’t pulled up the statutes for this and it’s likely dealt with on a case by case basis with the local building inspector but just looking at these two paragraphs, an owner that’s restriping their lot and adding HC spots may not have to bust up a concrete walkway to add a ramp. If they’re paying $1500 to have it striped, they may not be required to lay out another two or three thousand dollars to have the ramp installed.
This is one of those things where a big Wal-Mart/Planet Fitness/Other national chain might not have a problem doing, but a small business that’s been putting off the striping for 5 years might not want to double or triple the cost of the project and the inspector might say that’s okay provided they do take care of it when they eventually have to replace the cracking/crumbled curb.
Sometimes the law doesn’t make practical sense. It get’s pieced together to fix problems as they arise.
In a case like this, HC people couldn’t get into buildings so they made laws that required business owners to make their buildings HC accessible. Those things are expensive to retrofit but not as expensive to bring up to code when you’re already doing the work.
For example, an owner can’t just redo his bathroom to make it HC accessible, but if he’s about to tear it out and redo it anyways it won’t cost that much more to have the proper size toilet, grab bars, protected pipes under the sink etc.
So the g’ment says “Here’s the new code, you’re all good for now but as you replace and fix things you have to bring them up to code” That’s the idea behind grandfathering things.
The gym owner painted his parking lot and added the HC spot(s). If he had to redo his concrete first you probably would have seen a nice ramp up to the front door, but no HC spots.
A business has an unending list of expenses and can only do so much at a time. Turning that step into a ramp costs money.
From a practical standpoint it might not make sense to have HC spots when a wheelchair can’t make it to the door, but sometimes that’s just the way it works.
Right. And you already know it’s not “accessible” because the employee told you it’s not “accessible”.
Seeming absurdity on the surface, sure. And then you were given less superficial reasons why some people with handicapped placards might want to and be able to use a gym. And I agree with them - I’ve got patients who are post official physical therapy who go to the gym to continue their prescribed “home” exercise program. They can do stairs, but they still have and use (legitimately) a disabled parking placard.
Although I’ll be honest - I’d have a hell of a time with an 18" step, and I have perfectly functional legs. I doubt your estimate was accurate. Most stairs are less than 8". I sure bet it *felt *like 18", though.
Handicapped parking =/= wheelchair accessible. Is this really the first time you’ve noticed this? There are a lot of such buildings in my city. Grandfather clauses make sense to business owners, but they’re a bitch when you’re carrying a huge Cadillac of a wheelchair with a 90 pound woman in it!
So you’re saying that because the entrance is not accessible for some disabilities - like a wheelchair - but not others, they shouldn’t even have bothered to put in the handicapped parking spaces? :dubious:
Look, I very much sympathize with you. I have a friend who uses a wheelchair, and I’ve seen firsthand how even “accessible” places can be a pain in the ass for some disabilities. More than once we chose not to go to a particular restaurant/store/whatever because the accessible entrance involved walking a half a block away to find the alternate door that led to the rickety elevator that brought us up to whatever floor we needed to go to, then once there we had to figure out the way to the back door through some dimly-lit corridors. Not worth it.
But conversely, both my parents have handicapped parking permits because their old, my mother had polio as a kid, my dad has one ankle fused. Neither of them can walk long distances easily. But they could park close to a place and negotiate a tall step without much problem. I agree, in a perfect world, that step wouldn’t be there or there would be a ramp, but I don’t see the need to not even have the parking spaces because the entrance is not accessible for some (but not all) disabilities.
Aside from satisfying bureaucrats, not everyone granted handicapped parking privileges would find the building inaccessible. My spouse, for example, can manage stairs despite his spinal injury and handicapped sticker. Which doesn’t solve your problem regarding stairs, I understand that.
An 18" step is pretty goshdarn high, though. I just measured it and it’s just a few inches below my knee (I am 65" tall). That’s quite a large step even for ordinary people to clamber up.
A few things.
Handicapped parking is required by code in most places. The owner has no choice but to comply with the code.
Second, it’s been pointed out in this thread several times, the building was not inaccessible to ALL handicapped persons.
Seems that the owner has done what he can to make the building accessible to as many people as possible.
Yeah your friend was a dick to recommend that particular gym to you. Do you think he might have been playing a mean joke*?
*Maybe he didn’t think it would be mean and thought maybe you’d get there, see the giant step, roll your eyes and think, “Thanks dickhead.” and then just go on to your regular gym?
Ambivalid - I can’t find anything online, but I always suspected that your state or county (which I have spent a lot of time in), has regulations that exceed the Federal ADA requirements for handicap parking spots. Every parking lot there appears to me (as someone from another state) to be a sea of handicap spots, with a smattering of non-handicap spots. …Not meaning to start any debates, just sharing my perception.
What you need is one of these, but smaller. Set it down anywhere and presto! Instant ramp!
Yeah, that’s a foot and a half, and without some sort of photographic evidence to prove this, I just can’t believe that any business is going to have a step that high.
Hell, 8" would be pretty high. 18" isn’t a step, it’s a ledge. Forget handicappers trying to get up it, anyone trying to get down that (other than just jumping off if particularly spry) would be having issues.
I don’t want to keep rehashing the same things either but “accessible” has a particular, legal definition that is not met here. A handicapped person whose physical disability necessitated use of the handicapped parking spot-in most instances-is NOT going to find a foot and a half (I’ll post pictures for those not believing me) step something which can be traversed “easily and safely”.
Besides, shouldn’t the access be for the most handicapped people? If you’re least handicapped, you’re all set.
However, you’re not asking about the legality- the owner answered that: they’re grandfathered in. You asked why they’d bother. An answer is that perhaps they knew they couldn’t be completely/legal-definition accessible, but perhaps they could make it somewhat easier for a person with limited mobility. Of course they might have added the spots because they were forced to in order to be compliance with code.
From the OP:
Because all handicapped people aren’t unable to access the building. For those who can, the spots help.
7-3/4 inch height is code most places. A few even restrict it down to 7". I’ve seen older stairs a bit higher. 9 inches is about the limit. Anything higher would be a big problem for kids and the elderly to use. But, with old buildings I guess even a single 12 inch step is possible.
But what reason do you have to think that most people who need a handicapped parking space will find that step more difficult than a non-handicapped person? You’re kind of focused on the need for the handicapped parking being related to some difficulty with the legs- but that’s not necessarily true. You can get a permit for respiratory problems, cardiac problems, because you need to use oxygen , in NY for severe mental disabilities that make it difficult to use public transportation, and I came across a report of a man in Georgia who received one because of severe sensitivity to sunlight. Those people may have no more trouble than I getting up an 18" step. I don’t know which type of disability accounts for more permits- but I don’t think you do either.
Regarding the particular, legal definition of “accessible”, the owner told you that the building was exempt from those requirements. And if the building is grandfathered in and is therefore not required to have an accessible entrance, it’s not going to have an accessible entrance.The only options are whether it should or should not have handicapped spaces available for people with those other disabilities. Do you really believe the person with cardiac problems should have to park at the other end of the lot because the building is not required to have an accessible entrance?