Resources: Common Accessibility Errors and Omissions

Common ADA Errors and Omissions in New Construction and Alterations

Common ADA Problems at Newly Constructed Lodging Facilities

BSA Access Committee Members' List of Common Errors and Omissions in ADA and AAB

1. There is scope and jurisdiction confusion between Massachusetts and ADA requirements –in new construction and alterations the ADA applies to employee-only areas and AAB doesn’t.
2. A variance granted by the Massachusetts Architectural Access Board does not set a precedence. Each variance decision is specific to the case.
3. Drinking fountains protruding into the accessible path of travel.
4. Fire valves and hose cabinets protruding into the accessible path of travel.
5. Electrical outlets and switches found too close to corners (18” minimum is the required distance) This leads to a conflict when, in tight layouts, the strike side of the door clearance is the required 18” and the most sensible location for a light switch is next to the entry door.
6. Lack of visible emergency alarm devices where needed, for instance in enclosed spaces such as public toilets.
7. Confusion regarding uses that are not specifically addressed by the ADA or AAB regulations – such as science labs in school projects. – 5% or at least one of each unique feature must be accessible.
8. Non-compliant handrail grip profiles and distance from the wall interpreted as minimums rather than the required fixed dimension.
9. Excessive operating force for doors .
10. Lack of Braille characters in signage.

Site

1. Poured in place concrete ramps designed to 1:12 which invariably result in portions of the ramp being non-compliant, due to the nature of poured in place concrete. In tight quarters ramps must be designed to 1:13 slope as a minimum with a gentler slope if space is available.
2. Ramps included in the design even when a more careful grading job would have eliminated them altogether.
3. Accessible path of travel must be provided to all areas of the site not only between the accessible parking spaces and the main entry – all side walks must end in a transition feature (AAB).
4. Curb cuts that are not perpendicular to the path of travel.
5. Ramps not wide enough between the rail (the conflict between state & federal here contributes to the confusion. AAB requires 48” minimum wide ramps and AAB requires 36 “ minimum).
6. Cross slope in curb cuts is often misunderstood and not constructed properly.
7. Lack of appropriately designated van accessible parking space. Above grade signs are required.
8. Lack of appropriate posted sign at accessible parking spaces – the marking on the pavement IS NOT sufficient.
9. Lack of accessible route to school playing fields and through the field.

Public areas

1. Projects that include performance spaces – especially music performances, fail to provide access to all performance risers thus preventing people with disability from participating in a particular voice category.
2. Cafeteria tables with fixed sitting with no wheelchair accessible spaces.
3. Cafeterias that declare certain tables as accessible and segregate people with disability from the population at large.

Toiletrooms

1. Location of toilet paper holder and location of the flush valve handle not coordinated with the transfer side.
2. Rear grab bar in toilet room and stalls – must be 42” and not 36”.
3. Spaces designed with no tolerance and without taking thickness of finishes into consideration – ceramic tile in showers for instance.

Massachusetts Best of Accessible Design Awards, sponsored by the Massachusetts Architectural Access Board
(description)

BSA Access Committee 
52 Broad Street, Boston MA 02109 
617-951-1433x221 
E-mail the committee (access@architects.org)
BSA Access Committee Website (http://www.architects.org/access)