Not far from my home, they built a new police station. We call it the bunker. It is a butt-ugly building not in keeping with the style of the community. It looms over the intersection. I can deal with that. Maybe they felt that a menacing building would deter crime. It seemed shoddily built going up, but hey, what isn’t nowadays. But I read in the local paper that the idiot who designed it did not include an elevator. What is more the only wheelchair access or handicap access is via a 120 ft exterior ramp that still manages to be quite steep and as the finishing touch, has a handrail that is all but unusable.
No, say what you will about the ADA, it is law, and this building was designed as a public building after it became law. Also, it is just common sense in a community where the average age is 44 that you make public buildings accessible to all the public as far as possible. There is a woman who has been employed by the police department for some time that cannot negotiate that ramp from hell. She has been unable to go to her job since the department has moved into that building.
What the fuck? Who the hell approved that design without an elevator? Who decides that a steep exterior ramp in CHICAGOLAND is a good idea? Ever hear of winter? I thought architects were to design buildings that complied with the law. I would think that a POLICE STATION would be built in accordance with the law.
They weren’t. We used to speculate where the elevator would go. We never did figure it out. Apparently neither did they.
I like the ADA. I have sympathy for those who don’t want to change historical buildings, but also for those who want to visit them and can’t. For new buildings and new additions to old building this really makes sense. Not only does it assist the permanently disabled, it assists those who are carrying packages, or are temporarily injured.
I would be slightly more sympathetic if the building had any other redeeming characteristic. It does not.
I am an Architect and I have to admit it would be pretty amazing any public building could get that far without someone noticing that there wasn’t an elevator or other means of handicap access!
Not that it couldn’t happen–but that is still pretty amazing. There are many checks and balances during the review process–but it sounds like they all failed. A public builiding such as a police station should have numerous design review boards it has to pass, and numerous neighborhood associations that have to be pleased, and then there is the peer review and the building department review–that is where it should have been caught. This seems like an issue with Chapter 11 (not sure what code they are using there) which would require access. It is basically what the ADA states (the ADA is a law and building departments review for code compliance not law compliance).
The ADA is enforced by civil lawsuit if I recall–so it looks like that is how this will be handled. I will tell you that as an Architect it is difficult to design to the ADA–since it is a law and not a code. So you can think you meet the intent–but you don’t know for sure—it isn’t reviewed by building officials but if you meet Chapter 11 of the code or ADAAG (which is a technical analysis of the ADA) you have sort of a safe harbor. But since it is enforced by lawsuits you can still be sued by someone who feels your design doesn’t meet the ADA! So it is not an easy task–although the intentions are good.
Actually just rereading your account here–does it have access via this ramp? Well then it probably does meet the ADA and the code. There is no code requirement to provide an elevator (although common sense would seem to dictate that is the easiest way to do this–especially given the climate). But as long as there is reasonable access it may meet the ADA (not knowing the specifics it is difficult to know). But this is what I was referring to above—is this reasonable given the weather conditions? That is the crux isn’t it!
Perhaps they had budget issues–an elevator would be in the range of $60K whereas the ramp is probably cheaper. But as an Architect I can tell you that I would have fought for the elevator—who wants some ugly ramp on the building–but then given what you said of the building design they might be trying to cover it up!
No, I don’t have a picture. The article in the local paper said that the ramp was 120 ft long and that they would have allowed one 80 ft long at most. It has a steeper than 10% grade as well. The article also said that the railing on the ramp was of the wrong kind. The building will now be altered, an elevator will be added. It would have been cheaper to do it at time of first construction.
In my hometown, they built a brand, spankin’ new bus terminal downtown. Woo-hoo! It was fancy, it was snazzy, it was a cool mutherf**ker of a building! Hooray! An architectural pride and joy!
So they had a ceremony. They called the papers. They called the TV stations. Oh, yeah. The first bus ever would pull into the station platform and the ribbon would be cut!
So, here comes the bus. Oh, yeah! The ribbon-cutting scissors are poised at the ready!..
Um, what’s with the bus?.. Why is the bus sitting there? Why is the bus back up, then forward, back and forward?.. Isn’t it coming over to the platform?.. Wuzzat? Oh…
They didn’t design the driveway to the platform to accommodate the turning radius of a bus.
You guys don’t know from ugly building. We got one now, at the U of MN, art museum, Godawmighty ugly! Looks like it was made by a giant retarded cubist out of crumpled tin foil. I’d post a picture, but there’s probably some kind of law against anything that ugly. Beside, the Boards slow down when the hamsters are busy puking their furry little guts out.
I cannot believe that a public / office building over 1 story was made without an elevator. You don’t even have to bring the ADA into it. Any work type building generally needs to have heavy stuff moved between floors. Even boxes of files are not something that should be hauled around up and down stairs.
Not to slight Hakuna, but most architects I’ve met don’t live in the same world the rest of us do.
If the building has been turned over to the owner after receiving a Certificate of Occupancy, then it is no longer the architect’s responsibility. The owner and appropriate inspectors/permit department have OKd the building and theres no real recourse (IME anyway). While it is difficult to get an architect to admit they were wrong, I’ve never heard of a building department admitting a mistake (excepting the massive loss of life such as the recent Chicago Lincoln Park Porch Collapse). During the design/bidding phases, I’d guess that there was an elevator as an alternate cost and it was not choosen for whatever reason (most likely budget).
Re: the nongrooved stairs, if it’s against the law, then the contractor will fight with the architect about who has to pay for the replacement. It will likely be months before anything happens.
At least that’s my experience from the wonderful world of public building.
In WEymouth (MA) they built a new police station (hugely over budget, and stupid looking to boot). They opened the thing, then hastily closed (somebody forgot to install locks on the jail/holding cells!!). Nobody seemed to know why this (unimportant) detail was overlooked. In Newton MA, (a very wealthy suburb), they built a new high school, with an olympic-sized pool. Only the pool could NOT be used for swimming meets (it was built 2 inches TOO SHORT)! Again, nobody thought to check this out!
I guess in these case, you could take the architect to court-but that would take years and eat up thousands in legal fees.
I don’t know of the specifics of the building in the OP, but I can tell you another side of it.
Working in architecture isn’t as carefree as it is made out in the movies. Very rarely does the architect (especially those that work with the government or large corporations) have a final say on anything.
Very often, when drawing out the plans for a chain restaurant, I had to toe the code line. The chain insisted on certain things and would not spend a penny more than need be. I can’t begin to tell you what a headache this was, having to draw and redraw things until they would finally be code compliant. If there was a loophole, we would be forced to take it. I say forced because these jobs were our bread and butter. If the restauarnt chain pulled their business, we would have gone under.
So before complaining about the architect, take a look at the code book. You may be surprised as to what is in it and what is not. Take the elevator, as an example, if equal amenities are to be found on the ground floor, they may not have to put one in.
My experience, however, was the opposite as the OP.
We would typically have to make things ADA compliant at the expense of everything else. In one case we had to shrink the offices down because the janitor’s closet had to have enough wheelchair turn around space. Nevermind the fact that the janitor was not in a wheel chair. One day he might be and the laws were in place for that.
