carol a. cocuzzi, principal, accessibility matters, llc

Carol A. Cocuzzi, Principal

Accessibility Regulations Consultant Since 1988

Business Address: 49 Bigelow Street, Pittsburgh, PA 15207 Phone: (412) 403-3023 (VOICE / TDD) E-mail: [email protected] Website: www.accessibilitymatters.net

CAROL A. COCUZZI, PRINCIPAL

BIO

Ms. Carol Cocuzzi is Founder and Pr incipal of Accessibility Matters, LLC since 2008,

a small, woman-owned, accessibility consulting business which assists all businesses in all

industries, design and construction professionals, Federal, State, and local government

entities, and commercial and multifamily residential housing providers and developers

achieve accessibility compliance. Ms. Cocuzzi is responsible for the management, growth and technical services of her

company. In her capacity, Ms. Cocuzzi coordinates design and construction consulting

services including facility/building evaluations of new and existing properties, plan review

during from the schematic phase through construction documents, regulatory and product

review and research, self-evaluation and transition plan development, customized on-site

and online technical and awareness training programs, and expert witness services. Her

objective is to provide cost-efficient and practical modifications compliance

recommendations and suggestions to her customers to ensure they have meet the

letter...and spirit of all Federal, State and local disability-related laws and building codes. Ms. Cocuzzi has a thorough working knowledge of Federal Regulations including ADA

Title I: Employment, Title II: State and Local Government Programs, Services, and

Activities, and Title III: Public Accommodations and Commercial Facilities, Section 504

of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Architectural Barriers Act of 1968, and Fair Housing Act

of 1988. She is well-versed in the scoping and technical provisions of International

Building Code (IBC), and has been a certified Accessibility Specialist/Plans Examiner

through the International Codes Council (ICC) since 2003.

Additionally, Ms. Cocuzzi develops and participates in the company's customer service

sensitivity training programs, fire and life safety awareness programs and design and

construction training programs. She performs public speaking on behalf of the company

related to the ADA and other accessibility-related issues.

As a woman who has lived with a disability all of her life, Ms. Cocuzzi has a unique

understanding to the needs, challenges, and issues that face people with disabilities in their

everyday lives. This sensitivity allows her to bring a professional, personal and creative

approach to resolving accessibility concerns, particularly as it relates to removing barriers

within existing structures, in new design, construction, furniture/equipment usability and

functionality, and training.

ADDRESS: 49 Bigelow Street, Pittsburgh, PA 15207 PHONE: (412) 403-3023 E-MAIL: ccocuzzi@accessibilitymatter s.net WEBSITE: www.accessibilitymatter s.net


RELEVANT WORK EXPERIENCE

2008 to Principal, Accessibility Matters, LLC, Pittsburgh, PA

Present Founder of an accessibility consulting business that’s main objective is to

assist large and small businesses within all industries, design and construction

professionals, Federal, State, and local government entities, and commercial

and multifamily residential housing providers and developers ensure

regulatory compliance with all disability-related laws and building codes.

Responsible for all contract negotiations, management and growth of the

company and supervision of 1 part-time employee and 1 independent

subcontractor.

1994 to Vice President, Design Consulting Services (Promotion)

2007 Accessibility Development Associates, Inc., Pittsburgh, PA

An affiliate of Three Rivers Center for Independent Living, Inc.

Responsible for the creation, development, management and growth of the

design consulting services department that provides comprehensive plan

review, product research and review, contract warranty, educational training

series, and technical assistance services to businesses, corporations,

educational, governmental, and residential communities in their efforts to

comply with the Americans With Disabilities Act, and other anti-

discrimination accessibility-related laws, standards and codes. Management

includes the supervision of professional consultants and design interns.

1992 to Technical Assistance Coordinator (Promotion)

1994 Three Rivers Center for Independent Living

Business Accessibility Disability Awareness Department

Responsibilities included accessibility evaluation and plan review services of

public and privately owned buildings to determine compliance with Title II

and Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), Section 504 of the

Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and Fair Housing Act. Performed training on

Disability Sensitivity Awareness Etiquette to organizations and employers on

how to effectively interact with people with disabilities, as the public or

employees and co-workers.

1992 to HUD Approved Service Coordinator/Housing Counselor (Promotion)

1990 Three Rivers Center for Independent Living

Center for Independent Living of Southwestern Pennsylvania Responsibilities included assisting consumers/general public with disabilities

seek out / secure accessible, affordable and public or fair-market housing.

Performed Section 504 accessibility evaluations of federally-funded housing

providers to ensure that each housing property met all applicable accessibility

requirements under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and Fair Housing

Amendments Act of 1988. Conducted individual in-home assessments to

assist consumers to remain living in their homes by providing services such as

attendant care, peer counseling, design / product solutions, and housing

counseling services./ Assisted homeless individuals seek immediate

temporary and long-term accessible housing.


EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND

Stratford Career Institute (Distance Learning Program–Computer-Aided Drafting

Program (June 2015–present)

Edinboro University of Pennsylvania—School of Social Work (June 1981–October

1981. Did not complete due to family illness)

TRAINING

Participated in a seminar presented by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban

Development on the design and construction guidelines for residential facilities as required

under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.

Participated in the DesignDC 2005 conference sponsored by the Washington DC, Northern

Virginia, and the Patomac Valley Chapters of the American Institute of Architects (AIA),

Winter 2005. Sessions Include:

What’s New with the ADA

Building In Maryland

The Best Defense is a Good Defense (Risk Management)

A Mighty Fortress (Security Design Strategies)

Building in DC

There’s No Place Like Home (Fair Housing Law)

You’ve Started Your Own Firm, But What’s the Next Step? (Marketing)

Participated in the Ask the Department of Justice Teleconference Training, conducted

Maryland Coalition for Education and the ADA&IT, Winter 2005

Participated in the Annual ADA Update, conducted by Maryland Coalition for Education

and the ADA&IT Information Center for the Mid-Atlantic Region, Fall 2004

Participated in the first annual Conference on Emergency Preparedness for People with

Disabilities conducted the National Organization on Disability, Fall 2004

Participated in Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity Training conducted by the U.S.

Housing and Urban Development, and the Center on Universal Design, St. Paul,

Minnesota, 1993

Participated in the Conference on Barrier-Free Design conducted by the American Society

of Interior Designers, 1993

Participated in Training in the Americans with Disabilities Act, conducted by Three rivers

Center for Independent Living, Pittsburgh PA, Summer 1992


TRAINING (CONTINUED)

ADA Online Series through the U.S. Access Board and ADA National Network:

2009

June — Prepare for the unexpected: Emergency Preparedness/Evacuation for the

people with Disabilities

2010

February—Federal Facilities and the ABA Standards

June—Accessible Sidewalks and Street Crossings

September—DOJ's 2010 ADA Accessibility Standards

August—ADA & After School and Daycare Programs for children with disabilities

December—Accessible Play Areas

2011

March—Accessible Swimming Pools and Spas

April—Are My Recreation Facilities Accessible? Where Do I start?

August—Accessible Health Clubs and Fitness Facilities

October—Accessible Retail Stores and Spaces

December—Accessible Schools

2012

February—Accessible Courthouses and Courtrooms

May—Accessible Communication Elements and Features

August—Accessible Detention and Correctional Facilities

October—Assistive Listening Systems

November—Accessible Historic Buildings and Facilities

December—Accessible Medical Diagnostic Equipment

2013

January—Accessible Amusement Rides

February—Accessible Means of Egress

April—Accessible Restaurants and Cafeterias

May—Accessible Elevators and Platform Lifts

June—Accessible Fire Alarm Systems

November—Accessible Playground Surfaces

2014

July—Accessible Toilet and Bathing Facilities - Advanced session

August—Accessible Routes - Advanced Session

November—Accessible Retail Stores and Spaces - "Advanced Session"

December—Accessible Emergency Transportable Housing


PROFESSIONAL CERTIFICATIONS

Third Party Agency Certification, Certified by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania,

Department of Labor and Industry

International Conference of Building Officials Certification (ICBO), Certified by

ICBO and BOCA as a Building Code Accessibility/Specialist, plans examiner.

Summer 2003

PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS

American Institute of Architects (AIA) / National and Pittsburgh Chapters

International Codes Council (ICC)

Southwestern Pennsylvania Engineering Outreach

Master Builders Association of Western Pennsylvania

PROFESSIONAL / VOLUNTEER ACTIVITIES

Independent Living Task Force/Transportation Subcommittee

Southwestern Pennsylvania Transit Coalition

Port Authority 504 Task Force

Americans with Disabilities Act Transportation Working Group

Allegheny County Advisory Committee on Housing for the Homeless

Mayors Committee On Accessibility, City of Pittsburgh

Carnegie Mellon University ADA Barrier Removal Committee

Community College of Allegheny County ADA Barrier Removal Committee


Apostolou Architects, P.C. Plan Review—Brant Pittsburgh Motor

Speedway

Astorino

Plan Review—UPMC Children’s Hospital

Plan Review—Allegheny County Lab

Plan Review—PNC Park

Plan Review—UPMC Montefiore Hospital

Plan Review—3 PNC Plaza

Plan Review—Edinboro University Cooper

Hall

Plan/Product Review—Mitsubishi Hand Dryer

Bob Evans Restaurant

ADA Review—Restaurant Accessibility

Management Program Checklist

Plan Review—Parking/Carryout Conditions at

Lakewood

Buchannon Ingersol & Rooney

Expert Witness Services

Burns White LLC

Expert Witness Services

Bergman Walls

Plan Review—Majestic Star Casino Site

Review

Carnegie Museums of Pittsburgh

Facility Evaluation—Library

Facility Evaluation—Museum of Natural

History

Carnegie Mellon University - Academic Plan Review—University Center

Plan Review—Purnell Center for the

Performing Arts Plan

Plan Review—Doherty Hall

Plan Review—Baker Hall

Plan Review—Science Technology Building

Plan Review—Gates Center for Computer

Science

Plan Review—Baker Hall

Plan Review—Baker Hall Science and

Technology

Plan Review—Center Science and Technology

Center

REPRESENTATIVE CLIENT LIST

Carnegie Mellon University - Housing Plan Review—Doherty Hall

Plan Review—Mudge House

Plan Review—Welch Hall

Plan Review/Facility Evaluation—New First

Year Residence Hall

Chipotle Plan Review—Restaurant Footprint

City of Coeur d’ Alene, Idaho

Plan Review—City Curb and Pedestrian

Ramps

City of Pittsburgh

Plan Review—Allegheny Riverfront Park

Plan Review—Rachel Carson Riverfront Park

Project

Facility Evaluation—Allegheny County Jail

City of Pittsburgh Housing Authority

Plan Review—Elmore Square/Addison Terrace

Plan Review—Glen Hazel High Rise - Tenant

Bathroom Design

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania

Department of Conservation and Natural

Resources, Bureau of Recreation and

Conservation (BRC) Document Review—Best ADA Management

Practices for Recreation Facilities

Community Builders, Inc.

Tenant Accommodation Alternatives

Consultation

Plan Review—East Liberty Place South

Controls Link, Inc. Plan Review—New Office Building

Cope Linder Architects Plan Review—Pompano Park Casino, FLA

Custom Millcraft Corporation Plan/Product Review—Check Desk Furniture

Reviews (2)

Design 3 Architects Plan Review—Applebee's Restaurants


Design Alliance Facility Evaluation—Engineers' Society

Building

Plan Review—ALCOA Corporate

Headquarters

Plan Review—Rodef Shalom Temple Hill

House Association

Plan Review—GATF Headquarters

DJDC Architects Facility/Plan Review—Coventry Health Care

Building

Facility/Plan Review—United Steelworkers

Building

IBC-ANSI TA Guidance—UPMC Klinevester

Plan Review—Coraopolis Hts. Road 1555

IBC-ANSI TA Guidance—Chevron Temporary

Water Lab

Duquesne Light Company Plan Review—Entrance Doors

Plan Review—Office Renovation

EDGE Studio

Plan Review—The New Hazlett Theater

Plan Review—Carnegie Mellon University

Office Building

ESB Bank

Parking Lot Evaluations—25 Locations

First National Bank/Pennsylvania, Ohio,

Maryland


Foreman Group

Plan Review—Plum Senior High School

Gateway Engineers

Plan Review – Kmart Parking Lot, Peters

Township

Gardner + Pope Architects

Plan Review/Lazarus Furniture Store

Plan Review/Greater Pittsburgh Community

Food Bank of the Future

Plan Review/National City Bank

Plan Review /Cancer Care Center,

Wilmington, DE


Hertz Gateway, Inc. Plan Review/Gateway Unisex Toilet Review

Plan Review/HDR, Engineering Renovation

Plan Review/Gateway Eye Assoc. Ramp

Highmark, Inc. Plan Review—Data Center

Facility Review—6 Highmark Direct Retail

Stores

Plan Review—Kingswood Plaza

Plan Review—The Shops at Cedar Point

HO+K Sport Architects Plan Review—PNC Park

IKM, Inc. Plan Review—Allegheny County Jail

Reuse Project

Plan Review—VA Hospital Patient Room

Alteration

Plan Review—Phipps Conservatory and

Botanical Gardens

Plan Review—Pittsburgh Ballet Theatre

John Ryan Furniture Plan/Product Review—Check Desk

Plan/Product Review—24-Hour Check Desk

Plan/Product Review—Host/Universal

Workstation

Plan/Product Review—/Coffee Cart

Plan/Product Review—Phone Desk

Kawneer Company, Inc.

Product Regulatory Research—State/Local

Requirements for Doors

Product Review—Door Hardware Prototype

KSBA Architects Building Evaluation—Lexington Industrial

Park

Plan Review—Ellis School Renovations

Lami - Grubb Architects Feasibility Study—Carnegie Library of

Pittsburgh

Plan Review—Radisson Hotel

http://www.fnb-online.com/

http://www.fnb-online.com/


LaQuatra Bonci Associates

Plan Review—Convention Center Riverfront

Park Extension

Lowes Home Improvement Centers


MEDExpress Urgent Care Centers


Plan Review—Jackson, MI Prototype

Maclachlan, Cornelius & Filoni Architects

Plan Review—O'Reilly Theatre

Mars National Bank


Massaro Corporation Plan Review—ISR Building

Mascaro Corporation Plan Review—Encore @ 7th Street Apartments

Plan/Product Review—Shower water curb

products

Regulatory Review—Fair Housing

Amendments Act 1988

Mistick Corporation Plan Review—Munhall Municipal Building

Plan Review—Fairmont Apartments

Michael Graves Architect

Plan Review—O’Reilly Theatre

Michael Van Valkenburgh Plan Review—Allegheny Riverfront Park—

Phases I & II

National Aviary Plan Review—FliteZone Theatre

North Fayette Township Plan/Product Review—New Community Park

Northwest Savings Bank

Parking Lot Evaluations – 92 Locations

Oil City Housing Authority Plan Review/Century Terrace Family


Parsons Brinkerhoff Plan Review—Hot Metal Bridge Renovations

Penn Avenue Place

Plan/Product Review—Multi-Story

Conversion to Tenant Space

Perkins Eastman Architects Plan Review—Sylvania House

Plan Review—Felician Sisters Convent

Dementia Wing

The Pidcock Company Plan Review—Minor League Baseball League

Exterior Route

Plan Review—Borough of Boyertown Public

Rights-of-way

Plan Review—Upper Saucon Township Public

Rights-of-way

Pitt Dental School Plan Review—Dental School Renovations

PNC Bank, N.A. Plan Review—Miracle Mile

Plan Review—Two PNC Plaza

Plan Review—General Services Building

Rafael Vinoly Architects, P.C. Plan Review—David L. Lawrence Convention

Center

REI Plan Review—Conshohockhan, PA Employee

Rest Rooms/Shower Room

Plan Review—Texas, Storage Location

Plan/Product Review—Cash wrap

Plan/Product Review—Kiosk

R3A Architects Plan Review—Edinboro University

Plan Review—Housing Authority City of

Pittsburgh Dwelling Unit Renovations

Plan Review—Addison Terrace

Plan Review—Garfield Heights

Plan Review—Northview Heights


RTKL Architects, Inc. Plan Review—Highmark Data Center

Plan Review—MILDEP (Military Installation)

Plan Review—3000 Skyline Drive Office Bldg.

Master Plan Dev.—University of Buffalo

Building Condition Report—NARA: Dwight D.

Eisenhower Library and Museum

Building Condition Report—NARA: Harry S.

Truman Library and Museum

U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services—

Administration for Community Living

Shannopin Country Club

Facility Review - Parking Lot, Route and

Entrance

Senior Care Network, Inc. Plan Review—Washington County

Developments (3 developments)

SPC Realty Company


Sourceone/Terrytown Estates, NY

Plan Review—Cottages and Sports Facility

St. Anthony's Parish

Facility/Plan Review—Parking Lot and Rest

Rooms

Standard Property Corporation/Highmark -

Blue Cross Blue Shield Plan Review—Penn Avenue Place

Plan Review—Data Center

Plan Review—Cancer Care Center

Starbucks Coffee Plan Review—Coffee Station Location

Studio AB

Plan/Product Review—Elm At Calvert Plan

Review—Townhouse Dwelling Units

University of Pittsburgh

Plan/Product Review—U.S. Attorney General

Richard Thornburgh Room

Plan Review—New Residence Hall

Plan/Product Review—Langley Hall

Greenhouse


UPMC Health Services Plan Review—Magee Women’s Hospital

Patient Room Alterations

Product Research—Review/Magee Women’s

Hospital Medical Equipment

Plan Review—Montefiore Hospital Lobby and

First Floor Alterations

Plan Review—Passavant Hospital

Plan Review—Children’s Hospital of

Pittsburgh

US Homes Corporation, Elk Grove, CA.

Plan Review – Boardwalk at Lakeside Gated

Community

Turkall Associates Architects Plan Review—City of McKeesport Housing

Authority

Trizec Hahn Plan Review—Palamino Restaurant

Weber Murphy Fox Plan Review—Edinboro University/Student

Housing

Westmoreland County Housing Authority Reasonable Accommodation Consultation

for Tenant Dwelling Unit Modifications

Westin Convention Center Hotel Limited Evaluation/Plan Review—Accessible

Guest Room Renovations

White Castle Restaurant Plan Review—White Castle Restaurant

Prototype

WTW Architects Plan Review—South Side Works Theatre

Wolf Consulting, Inc. Plan Review—Murraysville Office

United Refining Company


Zamagias Properties


Carol A. Cocuzzi

PROFESSIONAL SPEAKING ENGAGEMENTS

Ms. Cocuzzi has developed the following educational presentations, and training programs

for professionals (architects, attorneys, engineers, developers and organizations), which are

certified for CEU’s and CLE’s.

“The ADA And the Restaurant Industry”

Co-presented with Joan Stein

Chipotle Mexican Grille Restaurant Designers, Contractors and Facilities

Management Staff

“Understanding the Needs of People with Mobility Impairments”

Co-presented with Joan Stein, and Mr. Ray Bloomer of the National Center on

Accessibility

PA Department of Parks and Recreation

“Thinking In the Box”


SPECS 2001 Conference in Nashville, TN—Co-presented with Joan W. Stein

“The ADA and the Small Business”


Allegheny Valley Rotary

“Understanding the Fair Housing Laws and the ADA”


US Department of Housing and Urban Development

Pittsburgh Regional Meeting

“Home Sweet Accessible Home”

Realtors Association of Metropolitan Pittsburgh

“An Ounce of Prevention is worth a Pound of Cure”


Pennsylvania Department Bureau of Managed Care Health Choices Program

Health Care Providers

“HealthyChoices”


Pennsylvania Department Bureau of Managed Care Health Choices Program

Consumers

“Fire and Life Safety Disaster Preparedness Program—Unlocking the Fear”

Co-presented with Mr. William Johnson, Corporate Security

Highmark


(CONTINUED)

Emergency Preparedness Program”

Co-presented with Mr. Frank Butter, Corporate Security

Winthrop Management

“Construction Projects and the ADA”


Lorman

“ADA Update—Then and Now”


Astorino

The Design Alliance

EDGE Studio

Massaro Construction

“2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design”

Astorino Architects

DJDC Architects

Environmental Planning and Design

“Uniform Construction Code”

City of Pittsburgh Bureau of Building Inspection

Desmone Architects

“Structure Reflects Values”

In-house training offered to design professionals within Southwestern PA

Co-presented with Joan Stein and Clifford Payne

“The ADA - It’s More Involved Than Toilet Rooms”


Burt Hill Kosar & Rittleman

The Design Alliance

KSBA Architects

Perkins Eastman Architects

MacLachlan Cornelius Filoni Architects

IKM, Incorporated

Hansen Architects

HDR Engineering

The Fair Housing Act and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973


Pennsylvania Housing Finance Agency

Carol A. Cocuzzi


(CONTINUED)

“Title II of the ADA: An Educational Experience”


University of Pittsburgh Facility Management Services

“Construction Projects and the ADA”


Lorman

“The ADA—It’s Not a Building Code, It’s Not an Option...It’s the Law”


Massaro Construction

“ADA and the Restaurant Industry”


MS Consultants, Inc.

“Section 504”


Housing Authority of the City of Pittsburgh

Ms. Cocuzzi has developed the following “2010 ADA Regulations and Standards for

Accessible Design Online Training Program Series” attended by more than 450

professionals (architects, attorneys, engineers, developers and organizations), which are

certified for CEU’s and CLE’s.

AIA DC, AIA Baltimore, AIA Eastern Tennessee, AIA PA

Housing and Redevelopment Authorities

State and Local Government

Retail and Shopping Centers

Children Day Care

Elementary, Middle and High Schools

Secondary Educational Institutions

Homeless Shelters

Health Care Providers

Recreational Facilities

Religious Organizations

Outdoor Developed Areas

Military Housing

Carol A. Cocuzzi

Publications

&

Articles

AUTHORED PUBLICATIONS

Co-authored with Joan Stein “With ADA, It’s `Buyer Beware.’ Building Operating

Management, January 2003

Co-authored with Joan Stein “ADA: Watching & Waiting”, Maintenance Solutions

magazine, April 2001

“Focus on Accessibility Will Make PNC Park Everybody's Ballpark”, Pittsburgh

Post-Gazette July 1999

Barrier-Free Design, Marketplace, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Carol A. Cocuzzi

With ADA, It’s `Buyer Beware’ Avoiding problems with new construction means asking

the RIGHT QUESTIONS of architects and contractors

facility

manag

em

ent

Building owners and facility executives rely on the guidance and knowledge of

architects and contractors when buildings are being constructed or renovated. Confidence in

the architect’s or contractor’s ability to meet all applicable codes and regulations is usually a

given. Just to be safe, of course, contracts include the clause “must comply with all applicable

codes and regulations” to be sure all the bases are covered.

Since passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) in 1990 and the

implementation of Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines, or ADAAG,

some building owners and facility executives have inserted specific references to

nondiscrimination and compliance with the ADA into contract language. On the surface, this

seems to offer all the protection needed. ADA is a federal law; it’s easy to assume that all

architects and contractors must comply with it and fully understand it. But in real life, things

aren’t so simple. Consider incidents like these:

The design professional submits plans for the renovation or construction to the

appropriate regulatory agency for approval. Municipal, city or state officials review the

plans and refuse to approve them because of noncompliant items under ADA, including

significant elements of the project (entrances, interior access, rest rooms, etc.). The

impact on the project timeline and budget is substantial.

The designer gets approval of the plans, which were designed in accordance with ADA.

However, due to contractor errors or omissions related to ADA, the occupancy permit is

denied following on-site review. Once again, the impact on the project timeline and

budget is substantial.

Either the architect or

contractor makes errors

related to ADA

requirements, but the

errors are not caught at

either the plan review or

the on-site inspection. The

project is completed on

time and within budget.

But within 10 days, the

ADA complaints begin:

parking problems, stairs

at entrances, doorways and, often, bathrooms. At first, the response to those complaints is that

they can’t be valid. How could a new building be completed if it did not follow “code”?

NOT A CODE

One problem with that response is ADA is not a building code; it is a civil rights law.

Although much of it is predicated on ANSI and other building code formats, the reality is that

complaints of noncompliance can be initiated solely on the perception of discrimination. But most

ADA complaints aren’t just a matter of perception; they involve failure to meet the requirements

spelled out in ADAAG.

Whose responsibility is it to meet those requirements? Ultimately, responsibility falls to

the building owner. Other construction professionals may also be liable, but that doesn’t mean the

building owner has no responsibility. To be an informed buyer of architecture and contracting

services, the best approach to take is “buyer beware.”

QUALIFICATION QUESTIONS

It’s worth investing some time upfront to be sure that the project expected is actually the project

delivered. Here are questions to ask architects and contractors; many apply to product

manufacturers and representatives as well:

Is the firm knowledgeable in the various disabilityrelated laws and requirements pertinent to

the project?

What is the firm’s design philosophy, particularly on accessibility and universal design?

What sets this firm apart from the rest?

Does the firm involve people with disabilities in the design process?

How disruptive will construction be to persons with disabilities?

If the scope of the project changes later, will there be additional fees? How will these fees be

justified?

Does the firm have a list of past client references for similar accessibility projects that can be

contacted?

The same approach applies to evaluations of product maintenance and warranties:

What is covered under the product warranty?

Does it include parts and labor or just parts?

How long is the warranty in effect?

Are there extended warranties that may be purchased?

What is the typical demand-response for repairs?

Does the vendor keep parts for the product?

How long does it take for the parts to come in?

What if parts are no longer available for the product?

If the product is a lift, can it be operated manually in the event of a power failure or low

battery?

Do manufacturers offer training in the installation and servicing of this equipment?

For purposes of ADA compliance, the facility executive must make sure that the building

owner’s interests are being protected. Doing that means asking the tough questions and

digging for answers. Make sure design and construction professionals include “errors and

omissions” in their liability coverage. If a complaint is made against the owner or

management of the building, be prepared with the documentation of the process used to

ensure ADA compliance.

Joan W. Stein ([email protected]) is President and CEO of Accessibility

Development Associates Inc. in Pittsburgh, and Carol Cocuzzi is Vice President of

Design Consulting services for that firm.

Accessibility Development Associates, Inc. is located at Three Gateway Center, 5th

Floor, 401 Liberty Ave., Pittsburgh, PA 15222. 412-471-4156 (Voice/TDD), 412-471-

4348 (Fax).

This article was originally published in the January 2003 issue of Building Operating

Management magazine. Reprinted with permission of Trade Press Publishing Corp.

ADA Experts Discuss 2010 Standards FacilitiesNet

By Chris Matt, Managing Editor

*Joan Stein, President & CEO, Accessibility Development Associates Inc.,

Pittsburgh

*Peter Berg, Project Coordinator of Technical Assistance, ADA National Network,

DBTAC Great Lakes ADA Center, Chicago

*Carol Cocuzzi, Pr incipal, Accessibility Matters LLC, Pittsburgh

Almost 20 years after its inception, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) has

undergone significant changes. The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) published the 2010

ADA standards in the Federal Register on Sept. 15, starting the clock on an 18-month

period maintenance and engineering managers can use to learn about the updated

regulations and their impact on facilities before they go into effect on March 15, 2012.

What are three key technical differences between the 1991 and 2010 standards?

STEIN: First, there's a change in the reach ranges for where you mount anything like a

dispenser, light switches or electrical outlets. Under the 1991 standards, they allowed for

a maximum of 54 inches above the finished floor for a side approach and a maximum of

48 inches above the finished floor for a front approach. The 2010 standards have

basically blended with the ANSI requirements and say it's 48 inches maximum for either

front or side. The second is probably the biggest one we find, and that is, under the 1991

standards, the requirements for the toilet center line — the space from the side wall to the

center of the toilet — is an absolute 18 inches. Under the 2010 standards, they again have

mirrored what's in the ANSI requirements, which is a range of 16-18 inches for a toilet in

a standard, accessible stall. They give the range as opposed to the absolute. Third, they

increased the clear-floor-space requirements for water closets in a toilet room.

BERG: One of the areas where the (U.S.) Access Board and Department of Justice

attempted to make compliance with the standards a little easier is, wherever possible,

they've gone to ranges instead of absolutes. There were fairly significant changes with

reach ranges. The 1991 standards allow for a higher reach range when an element can be

approached by a side or parallel approach. It's 54 inches on the high side and 9 inches on

the low side. The 2010 standards have unified that. So for either a forward or parallel

approach, the reach range is 48 inches on the high side, 15 inches on the low side. The

most significant thing is the new supplemental areas. In the 1991 standards, there were no

scoping or technical requirements for the various types of recreation facilities. Those are

now part of the 2010 standards.

http://www.ada.gov/

http://www.justice.gov/

http://www.access-board.gov/

COCUZZI: Facilities now can reduce down (the number of accessible seats in assembly

areas, for example) using the 2010 standards, where a lesser requirement is allowed. The

second is accessible routes. In the 2010 standards, they are requiring that accessible

routes coincide with those of the same areas as the general public, whereas, in the 1991

standards, it was always to the maximum extent feasible. The third one is different

requirements for toilet rooms because those are generally one of the most talked about

when it comes to accessibility. There are going to be new requirements for clear floor

spaces in toilet rooms.

Is there a difference between the 2010 standards and the 2004 ADA/Architectural

Barriers Act Accessibility Guidelines?

COCUZZI: The new ADA standards are based on what was developed in 2004 when the

new guidelines were originally supposed to come out. When the whole process began to

revise the guidelines to include different types of facilities and areas, it was originally

going to be adopted around 2004 or 2005. But they kind of sat there for a while. A major

difference in the 2010 standards is in the regulatory part, where they address ticketing,

service animals, safe harbors and communications, and mobility devices, such as

Segways.

How will the new standards affect compliance efforts?

STEIN: When you talk about the compliance process, it's an 18-year-old process, which

began on Jan. 26, 1992. What the Justice Department is doing with this set of regulations

and time frames is trying to deal with the fact that when they passed the ADA in 1990

and gave the 18-month period for the regulations to be completed — between July 26,

1990 and Jan. 26, 1992 — this was the first time in history companies in private industry

had obligations to address anything related to accessibility. The Justice Department is

trying to put in that same kind of grace or implementation period (with the 2010

standards). They are actually giving managers and everybody else more options because

as of Sept. 15, 2010, you could choose to use either the 1991 standards or the 2010

standards. But when you make that choice, as a colleague of mine said in an e-mail

recently: "You've got to pick that horse and ride that horse."

COCUZZI: Yeah, it will, particularly those that may be (undertaking projects) under new

construction and alterations. They're going to have the ability to use these standards and

reduce down, which will be cost savings to them. It will also enhance accessibility in

certain areas.

BERG: For some venue types, it may make sense or (managers) may want to use the

2010 standards. For example, I'll use assembly areas. For large assembly venues (such as

sports arenas), in the 2010 standards there are fewer wheelchair-seating locations

required. There is a reduction in the number of accessible wheelchair-seating locations.

For a larger venue, you can use the 2010 standards and actually remove some wheelchair-

seating locations and put in standard seats.

Can you explain the safe harbor?

COCUZZI: If you have a facility that you are in total compliance with under the 1991

standards, you're not going to need to have to modify anything until you decide to make

alterations after the 18-month period. Even beyond that, if you choose not to (make

alterations), and you're in compliance, you're fine.

BERG: The safe harbor becomes effective March 15, 2012. That's the date the 2010

standards are the only standards that can be used. At that point, if a building or facility

was constructed or altered in compliance with the 1991 standards or, if it was a state or

local government entity and they used UFAS (Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards),

they do not have to touch those areas. They fall into that safe harbor because they were

constructed or altered in compliance.

STEIN: Facilities have a period of time now where, if you are confident that your facility

is compliant — you've identified all of your barriers and have completed all readily

achievable barrier removal, or you altered or newly constructed since 1992 and you are

100 percent confident your design professionals really did understand (ADA) is a civil-

rights law and not a building code — then those can be your safe harbors. The safe harbor

means you will not have to do anything until the next time you touch that area — make

modifications that are structural in nature and affect primary function of the space.

When planning retrofits or new construction projects, how do managers balance the

need to comply with both ADA standards and building codes?

STEIN: It's important to understand that the ADA is a civil-rights law, not a building

code. The ADA does have a provision that, if there's a state or local code that provides

for a greater degree of accessibility or is more stringent, that will supersede the federal

standards. That is the only time they will supersede the federal standards.

BERG: It's the federal government that enforces ADA. Local building-code officials don't

have authority. They only have the authority to enforce the state building code or local

municipal code. ADA standards clearly state that wherever there is a conflict between the

federal code and a state code, you must comply with whichever provides greater access

or is least restrictive.

COCUZZI: Sometimes, if you comply with ADA and you don't comply with the building

code, you're not going to get your occupancy permit. We're hoping with these new

standards — which are actually based on ANSI A117, which deals with accessible

buildings and facilities — will reduce compliance issues between (ADA and ANSI). Up

until then, there were significant differences in the technical and scoping requirements

versus ANSI, and, a lot of times, significant confusion. That really caused great havoc

between the building-code inspectors and building managers that have these two

documents they have to comply with.

http://www.access-board.gov/ufas/ufas-html/ufas.htm

Why did the changes focus on recreational facilities, detention facilities,

courthouses, etc.?

BERG: Areas where there were no scoping or technical requirements in the 1991

standards, there are no safe harbor for those come March 15, 2012. The Access Board, in

its development of guidelines, recognized that there were certain facility types that

presented unique accessibility issues. Therefore, they felt that there needed to be specific

scoping, and more importantly, technical requirements for providing access at these

various types of facilities. Recreation facilities, courthouses, penitentiaries, holding cells,

for example, have different features that weren't really addressed in the 1991 standards.

COCUZZI: Up until this point, there were no technical or scoping regulations for those

specific areas. You had to think outside the box and say, "What can I do to make these

specialty areas more user friendly?"

STEIN: There are completely new areas in 2010 that were never addressed in 1991 —

children's environments, outdoor recreation, golf courses, boats, etc. There are new rules

that address those issues, and there is more specification and more detailed requirements

for things that were not clearly defined in 1991 but created quite a lot of litigation. There

are now technical and scoping requirements. Before (the new regulations), if you were

evaluating a child-care center under ADA, you didn't have anything that said a toilet can't

be any higher than X inches, or that a table where kids work can't be X inches. There

were no enforceable standards.

Can you talk about the effective communication portion of the changes?

STEIN: There is a lot more available now in terms of technology for effective

communication. It doesn't just say, "Effective communication dependent on the scenario

and the extent, duration, and importance of the communication." What (the DOJ) found

was there were too many lawsuits. People just weren't using common sense. When you're

installing (effective-communication measures) from the beginning, the cost is nothing.

It's when you didn't do it and you have to retrofit it (where it gets expensive). The

technology explosion — smart phones, video conferencing, etc. — that everyone is using

is also extremely effective for individuals with disabilities.

COCUZZI: Under the new regulations, a public accommodation is going to need to

include what is called video remote interpreting, which can be used as a means of

effective communication. For example, where they may have had to bring in a sign-

language interpreter, which is expensive, now they can do it real time through full-motion

video and interpreting. It probably in the long run will allow for a cost savings.

carol a. cocuzzi, principal, accessibility matters, llc

Documents