Passenger Trains > Union Station in Hot Water Over ADA Non-Compliance

From Eaters:

Denver's new living room, as the Great Hall at Union Station has been called, came under fire two days ago when a federal law suit was filed by the Colorado Cross-Disability Coalition (CCDC). The disability advocacy group argues that the Regional Transportation District (RTD) and the City of Denver through the Denver Union Station Project Authority have violated the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The operators of the various businesses housed in the newly renovated project have not been named in the action.

At the core of the complaint is a raised area in the center of the space that holds some tables, chairs, and two shuffle boards that the public, as well as those drinking and dining at the various establishments inside the project including the Terminal Bar, Pigtrain Coffee, and Milkbox Ice Creamery, are welcome to use.

"The two steps up to that platform make it completely inaccessible to someone in a wheelchair or other mobility device," says Andrew Montoya, legal program attorney for the CCDC.

There is a portable ramp that is available for that specific area but Montoya argues that such a device is cumbersome, dangerous, and, once again, in violation of the ADA. "We are requesting that they install a permanent ramp. As far as I understand, the shuffleboards are not a problem; the only issue is access to that ramp so a person in a wheelchair can sit up there with their family and enjoy perhaps a slightly better view," Montoya explains.

As of yesterday, the defendants in the action had not yet been served. A phone call to the City of Denver was unreturned. "I am speculating here because I don't know all the facts of the case, but once we figure out what is alleged, we'll take actions to fix it," Joe Vostrejs of Larimer Associates, operators of several of the businesses, says.

In the meantime, the project is hotter every day. Travelers, visitors, and locals alike have flooded the new hot attraction. With the opening of the Cooper Lounge, revelers have an extra reason to make the trek to LoDo. In a mere two weeks, Mercantile Dining & Provision, the last of the restaurants housed there, will open its doors.

Theodore Picraux
St. Peters, MO
Shuttletrain's Wanderings



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/01/14 08:46 by shuttletrain.

The Denver Post has an article on the eating and dining options. The pictures included with the article show the elevated area, etc although that's not the focus. FWIW, I'm surprised that the designers didn't anticipate that the layout failed to accommodate some persons with disabilities. It's a pretty basic element in 2014.


http://www.denverpost.com/food/ci_26153598/denvers-union-station-offers-full-menu-drinks-and

I was there Saturday to get my little Zephyr through the wash rack, and the raised area is a tiny little section of the floor, does not impede access to the trains, buses, or shops in my opinion.

But I have to admit that it take a great deal of talent to make any part of a 100+ year old building *less* accessible. My hat is off to RTD and the Architects involved.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/01/14 09:25 by nicknack.

---

It would help to include the city in the headlines, as their are many Union Station.

Lackawanna484 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> FWIW, I'm surprised that
> the designers didn't anticipate that the layout
> failed to accommodate some persons with
> disabilities. It's a pretty basic element in
> 2014.


They did meet the ADA, it is just the usual never satisfied community activists and their lawyers once again seeking a payday because whatever is never good enough and tantamount to Jim Crow/caste system/Holocaust. So they make specious arguments on how the ADA should be interpreted. From the article:

> There is a portable ramp that is available for that specific area

If this case actually proceeds to discovery or to trial, it will be interesting to see whose idea it was to provide the raised area (the architect or the owner) and whether anyone raised the possibility of ADA non-compliance during the design process.

darkcloud Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Lackawanna484 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > FWIW, I'm surprised that
> > the designers didn't anticipate that the layout
> > failed to accommodate some persons with
> > disabilities. It's a pretty basic element in
> > 2014.
>
>
> They did meet the ADA, it is just the usual never
> satisfied community activists and their lawyers
> once again seeking a payday because whatever is
> never good enough and tantamount to Jim Crow/caste
> system/Holocaust. So they make specious arguments
> on how the ADA should be interpreted. From the
> article:
>
> > There is a portable ramp that is available for
> that specific area

And is there an attendant available to setup/use the portable ramp 24/7, without a person needing to use it having to search for said attendant?

The group that brought this lawsuit sound like the bunch here in California that likes to go around a look for alledged ADA violations.
Their MO is to file the suit and then to settle out of court. They have caused more then a few small businesses to fail.

jst3751 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> darkcloud Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Lackawanna484 Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > FWIW, I'm surprised that
> > > the designers didn't anticipate that the
> layout
> > > failed to accommodate some persons with
> > > disabilities. It's a pretty basic element in
> > > 2014.
> >
> >
> > They did meet the ADA, it is just the usual
> never
> > satisfied community activists and their lawyers
> > once again seeking a payday because whatever is
> > never good enough and tantamount to Jim
> Crow/caste
> > system/Holocaust. So they make specious
> arguments
> > on how the ADA should be interpreted. From the
> > article:
> >
> > > There is a portable ramp that is available
> for
> > that specific area
>
> And is there an attendant available to setup/use
> the portable ramp 24/7, without a person needing
> to use it having to search for said attendant?

Even that can be iffy, as I understand the federal law. The preference is that the facility can be used by all, regardless of disability status, without unnecessary additional assistance.

The difficulty architects have with ADA compliance is that
there is nothing that can be used to determine just what must
be done. There are printed "guidelines", but these are
constantly changing based on court actions. There is a
mall based chain store where one went up 2 steps in a
"front porch" arrangement, and immediately down 2 steps
within the store. There were doors at either side of this
"porch" to allow unimpeded access. A successful lawsuit
stated that for ADA compliance, the "front porch" experience
had to be accessible for ALL shoppers to experience. The
fact that the alternative entrances were 2 feet away from
the "porch" didn't matter. (sigh)

Or the folks who sued VIA Rail over the Renaissance equipment, claiming it was not completely ADA accessible. And yes it all boiled down to how many inches wide this or that doorway was. Even though VIA had spent a great deal of money to make it accessible, it was deemed insufficient. So millions of more dollars were spent tearing apart railroad cars......

MEKoch Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Or the folks who sued VIA Rail over the
> Renaissance equipment, claiming it was not
> completely ADA accessible. And yes it all boiled
> down to how many inches wide this or that doorway
> was. Even though VIA had spent a great deal of
> money to make it accessible, it was deemed
> insufficient. So millions of more dollars were
> spent tearing apart railroad cars......

Well, wheelchairs are gettin' wider.....

> Well, wheelchairs are gettin' wider.....

Maybe that's because butts are getting wider.

Sometimes I see those "wide loads" in the motorized chairs at Wally*world and wonder what came first... The wide load that had to have the chair or the chair that caused the wide load.

Please don't flame me. I realize that some people have have medical requirements or conditions, but sometimes you just have to wonder.

John

Was the project done without a permit?
Meaning that a project of that size and stature HAD to have a permit issued by the city, was inspected several times at various stages of the construction, and got signed off as correctly done by a city inspector when the "final" inspection was performed.
How did city plan checks and city inspectors miss the ADA needs of the area at issue?

Here is the area they are talking about. You can see the two shuffleboard type tables in the background. The heck with them, if I was DUS, I would just take it out.
What they "do" need to do right now, is install a temporary ramp over the two closest unused tracks from the track side entrance. This would eliminate the walk or golf cart around the end of that commuter train track or the unnecessary elevator ride. Also when you are in the pedestrian tunnel, it is not marked very well which elevator you actually take up to the Amtrak platform.

---

mundo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It would help to include the city in the
> headlines, as their are many Union Station.

It isn't in the headline but it is certainly mentioned as the very first word in the original post. Go complain about trivial matters elsewhere. Thanks for your time.

MWP in STL

Should be in the subject line.

Dick

nonamemal Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Was the project done without a permit?
> Meaning that a project of that size and stature
> HAD to have a permit issued by the city, was
> inspected several times at various stages of the
> construction, and got signed off as correctly done
> by a city inspector when the "final" inspection
> was performed.
> How did city plan checks and city inspectors miss
> the ADA needs of the area at issue?

While terms like "ADA compliance" are often tossed around there are actually several laws which come into play, plus state regulations which may be even more specific. It's generally not the responsibility of city or county code inspectors to certify whether a project is compliant with ADA. Their job is to determine whether it's complaint with their building, fire, safety etc codes. Which may conflict in some cases with the broadest interpretation of ADA.

There's also the Pregnancy Equity Act, which assures women that they will have reasonable accommodations in the workplace, before, during, and after pregnancy. There's a lot of litigation now about access to lactation facilities, provisions for cooling areas for the expressed milk, privacy, etc. Some state statutes clearly expand rights well beyond those provided under federal law.

The landlord in my old offices was compelled to set aside a peaceful area, with private suites, etc near the child care facility on site, specifically to address the needs of several clients. It was a deal breaker (do it or we move) for several clients.

darkcloud Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> They did meet the ADA, it is just the usual never
> satisfied community activists and their lawyers
> once again seeking a payday because whatever is
> never good enough and tantamount to Jim Crow/caste
> system/Holocaust. So they make specious arguments
> on how the ADA should be interpreted.

Glad it's all so cut and dry for you. Next ADA design assignment I get, I'll forward to you.

the 2010 ADAAG is pretty clear on accessible routes. A portable ramp tells me that someone realized there would be an issue. They should have taken the time to properly design a permanent ramp.

darkcloud Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> They did meet the ADA, it is just the usual never
> satisfied community activists and their lawyers
> once again seeking a payday because whatever is
> never good enough and tantamount to Jim Crow/caste
> system/Holocaust. So they make specious arguments
> on how the ADA should be interpreted. From the
> article:
>

On what basis do you say ADA requirements have been met? Are you an architect or lawyer with a good background in the ADA?

My work occasionally involves meetings with/presentations to persons with disabilities. Some of them could be described as "activists" but none fit your negative depiction. In several presentations to a local organization of persons with disabilities, I have not always been able to answer questions to their satisfaction, nor make commitments they would like to have in place, but they have ALWAYS been respectful towards me.

One can also make the case that ADA infrastructure improvements benefit the general population. Travelers pulling suitcases through cities, vendors with food carts and others having to push or pull large wheeled objects benefit when curb cuts are made at sidewalk corners to enhance mobility for persons using wheelchairs.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/02/14 20:43 by RuleG.