Log In


Reset Password
Opinion Editorial Cartoons Op-Ed Editorials Letters to the Editor

Accessibility

Local facilities should endeavor to correct challenges for disabled patrons

The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 was a crowning achievement in eliminating discrimination in employment, public services, transportation and at businesses against those with physical or mental conditions that limit mobility or access to facilities. The bill was modeled on the premises that informed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and it has had sweeping success toward its goal of functioning as an equal-opportunity law for people with disabilities. There is still work to be done, however, and as a city rife with architecture and construction that predates the ADA and its requirements, Durango has no shortage of needed improvements to accessibility.

That diagnosis is the simple part. Under the ADA, businesses, state and local governments, transportation providers, employers, schools and other purveyors of public services cannot discriminate against those with disabilities, and are compelled to provide all comers with the same opportunity to participate in commerce, employment and government services. The practical application of the law’s wide-ranging intent, as far as facilities go, is that all new and remodeled construction must include design components that accommodate those with disabilities: namely ramps, sufficiently wide doorways and restrooms.

The law also requires existing facilities to remove any “architectural barriers” to access, but recognizes the challenges therein. Installing these features can be cost-prohibitive, particularly for aging structures designed long before the ADA. Nevertheless, failing to invest in that accessibility limits options for those who have disabilities, and therefore denies them the equality of opportunity the ADA is committed to providing.

Finding the balance between the guarantee of accessibility – and, conversely, protection from discrimination – the ADA rightly extends to all Americans, and the cost of providing that guarantee is the crux of the issue for many facilities. The law recognizes there are many variables contributing to whether and how a business can comply with the ADA – namely cost – and considers each case accordingly. If “removing the architectural barriers” is not “readily achievable” – that is, “easily accomplished without much difficulty or expense,” the business is less likely to face scrutiny than one where such remodels are “readily achievable.” For those patrons who are limited by the architectural barriers, though, the problem remains.

That is where the local community can and should work together to remedy as many accessibility issues as are attainable. The Southwest Center for Independence has rightly drawn attention to the many shortcomings at local establishments – business and public – and the Accessible Communities Team has brought grant funding to the city to help offset the cost of needed improvements. Those businesses that install an accessibility-related improvement can receive funding to pay for half of the work. Still, though, there is an investment required – albeit a needed one.

These sorts of improvements should be on the forefront of business owners’ and facility operators’ minds when shaping long-term plans. Not only is providing access the law, it is quite simply the right thing to do. Designing retail and public space with this essential ethic in mind has been the law of the land for 25 years; those entities that are still behind in adhering to it must invest more effort in learning the law, and overcoming their real or perceived barriers in following it. There is help available to do so, and the remaining investment is an essential one.



Reader Comments