Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I think there's several sides to this.

One side is the ADA is from 1990, and 30 years is a long time to wait for public places of business to be accessible. It is compelling to say you must be open for business for all people, if you're open for business.

On the other side, sometimes the required renovations are expensive. Part of the problem is that building modifications may trigger compliance requirements, but many jurisdictions don't check for accessibility (or not properly) as part of a modification permit. It would be good for accessibility to be checked as part of occupancy permits as well.

Another part of the problem is that the enforcement structure of private lawsuits is by nature very adversarial. There's pros and cons, but it means business owners need to budget for renovation and legal fees in response to a complaint filed by lawsuit.

I wish there was a better way to acheive compliance, though. If you can't afford the renovations now, make the plan now, and a binding commitment to set aside funds for it, and make the renovations when funds are ready, or within the 18? months. And the commitment follows the occupancy of the building --- like a lien. If the renovation is not done as comitted, the premises are no longer a legal place of business until they are. This may help encourage landlords to participate in making their spaces accessible --- it will need to be done before they can rent to another business if the current business is forced to leave.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: