Flawed renovation projects at several commuter rail stations in New York and a New Jersey “bed and breakfast” have galvanized United Spinal Association’s legal team, prompting formal complaints to the federal Department of Justice charging violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
Program Counsel Kleo King said that United Spinal attempted to resolve the problems amicably, but negotiations had stalled. “Unfortunately, progress was at a standstill, so we had to proceed to the next step—filing an ADA complaint.”
King reported that accessibility problems were discovered last summer at several Long Island Rail Road (LIRR) station renovation projects. Work at a Long Beach station parking garage resulted in several ADA violations, including the size of the accessible parking spaces and incorrect signage. While United Spinal was able to work with LIRR officials to remedy the problems at Long Beach, “we were not as successful at two other stations, where the remedy may prove more difficult or expensive,” she said.
ADA complaints were filed against the LIRR and its parent organization, the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, for violations at the Forest Hills and the Murray Hill stations, both located in Queens, New York.
King explained that whenever commuter rail stations undertake alterations, the ADA requires that the station, or the part of the station, being altered, be made “readily accessible to, and usable by, individuals with disabilities, particularly individuals with mobility impairments.” She noted that the ADA also requires that 20% of the alteration cost be used to provide an accessible path of travel to the station. “For example, if an alteration cost $1 million, then an additional 20%—or $200,000—must be made available for the path of travel.” She noted that a developer is not required to spend more than 20%, and if ADA requirements can be met for less than 20%, the developer is not bound to spend the full amount.
United Spinal contends that a ramp project at LIRR’s Forest Hills station was constructed in a way that violated the ADA Accessibility Guidelines (ADAAG) and made the ramps unusable to many people with disabilities. “Specifically, many sections of the ramp exceeded the 1:12 slope, the level ‘resting’ platforms are no longer level and, in many instances, sloped to the extent that the installation has become one, continuous sloping ramp,” King said.
A 1:12 slope means that, under ADA requirements, for every inch of rise, there must be 12 inches of ramp length. Thus, if a platform is 24 inches off the ground, the ramp must be 288 inches, or 24 feet, long.
King also pointed out that handrails were mounted below the 34-inch minimum height and the materials used have caused some railings to break off at the mounting fixture, creating an unsafe condition.
Problems at the Forest Hills station have also drawn media scrutiny. WNYC, the National Public Radio affiliate in New York, picked up the story and aired a segment in June featuring King and United Spinal’s Director of Special Projects, Victor Calise.
At LIRR’s Murray Hill station, a $4 million renovation somehow neglected to provide access to the train platforms, which are below grade. “While LIRR officials claim they performed a cost analysis for adding elevators to Murray Hill, documents acquired in a Freedom of Information Act request seemed to indicate that the cost was for an independent job rather than as part of the $4 million alteration contract,” King said.
LIRR estimated that an elevator would cost 36.98% of the total project cost and 19% would be required for “contingencies,” which may never materialize, she explained.
“Finally, there was no evidence that other, less expensive, alternatives to provide vertical access to the platforms, such as Limited Use/Limited Application (LULA) elevators, were ever considered.” LULA elevators are defined as power passenger elevators where the use and application is limited by size, capacity, speed, and rise, intended principally to provide vertical transportation for people with physical disabilities.
The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) referred the complaint to the U.S. Department of Transportation which has passed it along to the Federal Transit Administration where a case number has been assigned.
When is a B&B Not a B&B?
In January, United Spinal received a complaint claiming that the Raritan Inn Bed & Breakfast in Middle Valley, New Jersey, was inaccessible. The allegation came from a New Jersey resident with mobility impairments who uses an electric scooter.
United Spinal attorneys believe the Raritan Inn clearly fits the ADA’s definition of a place of public accommodation as “an inn, hotel, motel, or other place of lodging, except for an establishment located within a building that contains no more than five rooms for rent or hire and that is actually occupied by the proprietor of such establishment as the residence of such proprietor.” Asdal Restorations LLC is the owner of the Raritan Inn and William Asdal is the principal of Asdal Restorations.
Upon investigating the complaint, United Spinal’s Accessibility Compliance Specialist John Rooney learned that the while the Raritan Inn contained only five rooms, there were substantial alterations to primary function areas of the building, including the addition of sleeping rooms and bathrooms within the sleeping rooms and alterations related to the building entrance. Also Asdal was not living on the premises. The inn is owned by a corporation and another individual had been hired as the inn keeper.
Rooney informed Asdal of a possible ADA violation since the extensive restorations to
the inn did not include an accessible route in conjunction with the 20% rule of ADAAG or an accessible sleeping room. Asdal’s attorney responded that the ADA issue had already been litigated before the Hunterdon County Construction Board of Appeals, which ruled that the ADA did not apply to the Raritan Inn renovation project.
Rooney informed Asdal’s attorney that the Hunterdon County Construction Board of Appeals does not have jurisdiction to either enforce or waive ADA requirements and that United Spinal would file a complaint with the DOJ.
Since 1994, United Spinal has litigated seven court cases on ADA violations and filed 12 administrative complaints to the DOJ, King said. She advises that readers who believe a new construction project may be in violation of ADA requirements should call United Spinal Association at 718-8033782 and ask to speak to the Office of the General Counsel.
Rob Ingraham is senior editor in Communications at United Spinal.
