1. POSTECH H uman S ystem D esign Lab oratory Ch. 18 Interpreting accessibility standards: Experiences in the U.S. courts 2008. 7. 10. Thu. 김 충 식

2. POSTECH H uman S ystem D esign Lab oratory Introduction  Accessibility & Universal design  Being readily able to enter a building and spaces inside  The ability to utilize and enjoy all the facilities contained in any building  This chapter…  A brief description of the American legal system  ADA  A brief review of a few cases  Conclusion 2

3. POSTECH H uman S ystem D esign Lab oratory The American legal system  The tripartite division in American legal system  Congress Law and rule making through policy  Department Of Justice (DOJ) Develop detailed regulation and enforcement lacking in the law  Court Interpretation and application  None of these governmental entities declared unequivocally what the law required 3

4. POSTECH H uman S ystem D esign Lab oratory The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)  The Americans with Disabilities Act was signed into law by the president on 26 July 1990  Purpose  End discrimination against persons with disabilities  Persons with disabilities would be moved more effectively into the mainstream of social and business life  Some component of the ADA provide clear guideline 4 Capacity of seating in assembly areas# of required wheelchair locations 4-251 26-502 51-3004 301-5006 Over 5006, plus 1 additional space for each total seating capacity increase of 100

5. POSTECH H uman S ystem D esign Lab oratory The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)  Many sections of the ADA are vague, unclear, and at times incompatible  Definition of discrimination, for public accommodations and commercial facilities  If a person using a wheelchair must enter Building A and progress over a a second- story crosswalk to get into Building B, is this to be deemed to meet the requirement of the law?  Designed and constructed the facility or embrace designers and constructors? 5 A failure to design and construct facilities for the first occupancy later than 30 months after July 26, 1990, that are readily accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities…

6. POSTECH H uman S ystem D esign Lab oratory Cases  The MCI Center Case (1996)  The first major ADA adjudication dealing with assembly facilities  Complainants Paralyzed Veterans of America & 4 persons with disabilities –There were insufficient wheelchair locations –They were not acceptably integrated, or dispersed –Only a small percentage offered unobstructed sightlines  Defendants Ellerbe Becket Architects and Engineers (EBAE), the firm that had designed the MCI center, and 7 others (owners, engineers, constructors, and operators) –The ADA did not hold architects liable for errors of commission or omission  District Court Judge agreed with EBAE’s argument The firm was not liable for any ADA-related shortcomings in MCI center design Defendant was not required to provide lines of sight over standing spectators, because of the wheelchair sightlines regulation had not been promulgated properly by the DOJ He believed that the architects had acted in good faith 6

7. POSTECH H uman S ystem D esign Lab oratory Cases  The Rose Garden, Portland, Oregon, Case (1997)  Complainants Placing 33 wheelchair spaces on Level 7 (the highest level of the upper section), where there were no other fixed seats, violated the dispersal requirement Had placed seats for ambulatory companions of wheelchair patrons in the row in front or behind them  Defendants Next to each other arrangement would result in a loss of 790 ambulatory seats “One percent plus one” should not be applied because few persons using wheelchairs attend events at the Rose Garden  Judge Ashmanskas The firm was liable for any ADA-related shortcomings in Rose garden Defendant was required to provide lines of sight EBAE had acted calculatedly, watchful of expenses and loss of profits 7

8. POSTECH H uman S ystem D esign Lab oratory Conclusion  The tripartite division in American legal system has produced awkward results  Congress make the law imprecisely and incompletely  DOJ develop detailed regulations and guidelines  Judge clarify the law But the courts did not completely clarify all requirements, sometimes ruled contradictory  The law keeps changing  The regulations and standards change when Court makes or interpret regulations This means that architects have to be aware of the law, regulatory changes, and latest ruling by courts in the jurisdiction and court To follow the law, designers will need to know not only the law in its original form, but also rulings by courts in the jurisdiction that become law by precedent 8