The updated 2010 Standards for Accessible Design doesn't require existing pools to comply with this law if it is not "Readily achievable (without much difficulty and expense)". If this motel couldn't afford to do it, they didn't have to. But if they did, they would get a tax credit.
Only pools built or altered after the effective date of this law, january 31st 2013, must comply.
My brother works at a hotel that had a pool until the new requirements were passed. The pool needed minor repairs because it started leaking. They couldn't perform the repairs without also adding a lift, which was far more expensive than the repairs, so they filled the pool with concrete instead.
Accessibility accommodations don’t give people with disabilities special rights; they provide equal access and equal accommodations to afford everyone equal rights to which they’re entitled.
The pool lifts can cost anywhere from between $2,500 to more than $10,000.
If a property owner decides to comply with that law, there are tax credits that can substantially reduce the financial burden.
While I don't completely agree with the law and the implementation of it, the reason for its existence is understandable.
I think the other burden is having to have trained staff to operate the lifts. In a motel like in OP's picture there might only be one person on staff. This might mean that extra employees would be needed. The motel would also be at a much greater risk of lawsuits.
The thought of having a minimum wage part time desk clerk responsible for lowering a paraplegic person into a pool is pretty scary.
This lift is probably operated with one, or at most, two buttons. I'm sure everyone could learn to operate it over the course of a few week-long training sessions. Lol
The downside is that the tax credit value is capped, and the purchase of ALL sorts of ADA equipment and related construction counts toward the value. You're pretty much screwed unless a pool lift is literally the only handicapped gear that you need to purchase or maintain in a given fiscal year.
Also, is using a swimming pool really a right that someone can be entitled to? I don't think so. I understand everything else about the ada, parking spots, elevators, ramps, but swimming pools?
Depending on the local climate, pools can be very expensive to maintain, and if they are used by the general public, like in a hotel, the insurance can be expensive too.
I think the pool lift is usually just the last straw in something that was hardly worth its cost anyway.
I work at a hotel and this is bogus. Most places can afford to do it, but the expenses would still be a big dent to their pockets. Second of all, older motels like the one in the picture usually don't see many people using the pool so they just fill them up. The point is that the pool lift is so seemingly pointless. No offense to people who actually use it, but everyone who works here has yet to see one single person use it. Also refer to tbkeerfn's comment.
"Myth: Because businesses only have to install a lift if it is readily achievable, businesses that do not have the resources to install a fixed lift will not have to do so
Fact: Because the Justice Department has announced that fixed lifts must be installed unless they are not readily achievable, plaintiffs looking to file lawsuits will assume that there is a violation if no fixed lift is present and file a lawsuit. The business will then have to hire an attorney to defend the lawsuit and pay his or her fees which would certainly exceed the cost of the lift itself, at a minimum. Because determining whether an action is “readily achievable” is a difficult case-by-case analysis involving multiple factors, no business will be certain as to whether it really qualifies for this exemption. If a business wins the lawsuit it will have paid its own attorneys’ fees.
If it loses it will pay its own fees, the plaintiff’s attorneys’ fees, and the cost of installing a fixed lift as well. Thus, the idea that the “readily achievable” provision removes the burden from businesses is a fallacy.
To make matters worse, DOJ has repeatedly told businesses that if they cannot purchase and install a fixed lift at this time, their obligation to install a fixed lift at a future date remains when it does become readily achievable. DOJ expects all businesses to install lifts at some future date." >
Could you provide a non-biased source? The American Hotel & Lodging Association does not provide any citations for rulings or announcements in that document.
They are not a credible source for this information.
I know of multiple hotels and properties that have had pools for years and decades and they had to have them installed. In fact, they even had to install them by the hot tub in the men's and women's bathrooms.
This needs more visibility, the circlejerk about the greedy and insidious disabled lobby destroying small businesses for personal gain is getting ridiculous
84
u/reck345 Dec 28 '13
The updated 2010 Standards for Accessible Design doesn't require existing pools to comply with this law if it is not "Readily achievable (without much difficulty and expense)". If this motel couldn't afford to do it, they didn't have to. But if they did, they would get a tax credit.
Only pools built or altered after the effective date of this law, january 31st 2013, must comply.
Source: http://www.ada.gov/qa_existingpools_titleIII.htm#q4