Accessibility problems to be tackled in conference

To overcome persistent conflicts between new urbanists and advocates for the disabled, the lobbying group AARP has agreed to host a conference in which the participants will try to reach a consensus on access requirements for one- to three-unit residences. During a contentious session on access and visitability at the CNU annual conference in Philadelphia, Laura Hall of Fisher & Hall Urban Design broached the idea of forming a CNU-AARP task force. What evolved from Hall’s proposal was a promise that a conference will be held in six to eight months, hosted by AARP. Brewster Thackeray in the Office of Social Impact at AARP said the conference most likely will take place in Washington, DC. (“AARP” used to stand for “American Association of Retired Persons,” but the organization is now trying to recruit members as young as 50, and has stopped using its former full name.) Edward Steinfeld, director of the Center for Inclusive Design and Environmental Access at the State University of New York at Buffalo, said accessibility for the disabled is required by law in buildings of four or more units. The issue is what to do about buildings of three units or fewer, many of which, Steinfeld said, “are not accessible.” He noted that by 2030, people over 65 will make up 20 percent of America’s population, and that “most people want to stay in the house they’re in.” easy solutions overlooked Although disability rights groups have argued for years that every new house should have at least one “zero-step” entry so that a person in a wheelchair can visit, Eleanor Smith of the group Concrete Change said that “easy solutions are being omitted over and over again.” Steinfeld agreed that visitability is lacking, saying, “There are a lot of missed opportunities in new urbanist communities.” At Abacoa in Florida, for example, he found houses with one step at the rear, an impediment that he believes could easily have been eliminated. John Anderson of New Urban Builders in Chico, California, expressed alarm that builders, developers, and others can now be sued in the federal courts for civil rights violations, on the basis of having failed to provide sufficient access for the disabled. He said the threat of a federal lawsuit is an “unreasonable burden to put on people” such as himself. Anderson argued that questions of whether access is a civil right and whether access is a matter for local officials or higher authorities need to be clarified. If access is a civil right, it should apply to all buildings, even existing single-family houses, he said. If it’s not a civil right, he reasoned, it should be a building code enforcement issue — something much less frightening for those in the building industry. Andres Duany said regulations like those in Dade County, Florida, need to be simplified. “What I don’t like is people writing standards and administering them by lawsuit,” Duany said. Brewster said what’s important is that each housing unit offer a disabled visitor “a pleasant, attractive way to get in” to the first floor — possibly through a rear door but not through a garage. “We need to have more flexibility in the codes,” Steinfeld said, adding, “We need a pattern book for one- to three-unit buildings.” Some argued that ramps are costly and ugly and that ramps should be allowed to be steeper in some circumstances. Duany said current thinking about access is too simplistic, premised on the idea that every old or infirm person be able to do everything himself rather than occasionally asking for help from others. Brewster replied, however, that “people do get isolated. There’s care-keeper burnout. People with disabilities want to live independently.”