# FHA Guideline vs ANSI A117.1



## Jean Tessmer-HI (Apr 2, 2021)

I was told by an attorney to forget all the requirements in the 1991 guidelines and the Design Manual.   He said the guidelines lowers accessibility i could have problems later on.  He said because HUD refers to ANSI A117.1 so when there are words not defined we are supposed to defer to the ANSI Standard and use that to fill in the blanks.  Is this what other contractors are finding out?  This would be for FHA covered dwellings and FHA tax credit funded housing.

Is there a comparison between FHA Guidelines and the ANSI A117.1 1986?
Which one allowed only one handrail down steps?

Thank you.


----------



## Jean Tessmer-HI (Apr 2, 2021)

I meant to say ANSI A117.1 1986.


----------



## Mark K (Apr 2, 2021)

If you are a contractor I would ask the Architect.

The building department enforces the building code and does not rule on appropriate of  accessibility standards not adopted by the jurisdiction.

It is my understanding that the building code provisions have been deemed to satisfy the accessibility requirements thus providing a safe harbor.  Can somebody verify?.


----------



## mark handler (Apr 3, 2021)

*FAIR HOUSING ACT DESIGN MANUAL*
STATE AND LOCAL CODES 
_All states and many cities and counties have _​_developed their own building codes for accessibility, usually based in whole or in part on the specifications contained in the major national standards such as ANSI and UFAS. Many states also have  nondiscrimination and fair housing laws similar to  the Fair Housing Act and the Americans with  Disabilities Act. _​
_When local codes differ from the national  standard, either in scope or technical specification,  *the general rule is that the more stringent requirement should be followed.* Many states also have  provisions that a certain percentage (often 5%) of  new multifamily housing must meet more stringent  physical accessibility requirements than required  under the Fair Housing Act. In such cases, both the  state’s mandated percentage of accessible units must be provided and all dwellings covered by the Fair  Housing Act must meet the Guidelines_​_


			https://www.huduser.gov/publications/pdf/fairhousing/fairfull.pdf
		

_​


----------



## SH225 (Apr 3, 2021)

These are the safe harbors - Safe Harbors. The idea is to choose one for purposes of Fair Housing compliance, so we're discussing safe harbor #3. The scope is in the guidelines. It refers to ANSI A117.1, such as saying "Stairs nearby or within sight of accessible route must comply with ANSI 4.9." ANSI A117.1-1986 4.9 then shows all the requirements for stairs, including handrails on both sides. One of the hazards of using 1986 as your safe harbor is it also requires a 12-inch horizontal extension at the bottom of the handrails. That dropped out in later editions.


----------



## ADAguy (Apr 4, 2021)

Housing remains a moving target, depending on your role/roles: Developer, landowner(private/public/university), designer, builder, AHJ, funding source, tenant, it depends.


----------



## redeyedfly (Apr 5, 2021)

SH225 said:


> These are the safe harbors - Safe Harbors. The idea is to choose one for purposes of Fair Housing compliance, so we're discussing safe harbor #3. The scope is in the guidelines. It refers to ANSI A117.1, such as saying "Stairs nearby or within sight of accessible route must comply with ANSI 4.9." ANSI A117.1-1986 4.9 then shows all the requirements for stairs, including handrails on both sides. One of the hazards of using 1986 as your safe harbor is it also requires a 12-inch horizontal extension at the bottom of the handrails. That dropped out in later editions.


Extension is still required in ANSI and IBC, one tread length continuing the slope of the handrail.  

To the OP:  You must follow both the FHADM and whatever safe harbor you choose.  It seems like most places are on the 2009 ANSI but you can choose any of those listed by HUD if there isn't a local adopted accessibility code.


----------



## SH225 (Apr 5, 2021)

redeyedfly said:


> Extension is still required in ANSI and IBC, one tread length continuing the slope of the handrail.


The extension turned horizontal in ANSI A117.1-1986. See attached.


----------



## tbz (Apr 5, 2021)

The feds just updated last month the new Safe Harbor allowances for HUD

Here is the link to the federal registry






						Regulations.gov
					






					www.regulations.gov


----------



## Yikes (Apr 5, 2021)

Jean, we can be most helpful to you if you can get very specific about the particular project.  I assume this is housing, because you mention FHA.
Yes, the project has to comply with FHA at a minimum, if it has 3+ units of rental housing or 4+ units of for-sale housing.
You did not say what city or state the project is located in.  Your local building official can advise you if there are applicable state and local accessibility codes, in addition to whatever the life-safety codes say about handrails .  

Does the housing have a leasing office?  If so, it's a place of business, subject to ADA Title III.

Does the project utilize public funds to purchase, construct, or operate the site or the housing?  If so, the housing is considered "public housing" and is also subject to the requirements of ADA Standards for dwelling units.
If it has public funding, did that funding originate from the federal government (tax credits, CBDG or HOME funds, HUD mortgage grants, military housing, etc.)?  If "yes" then you are subject to Section 504 and the Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards, which have 12 additional requirements beyond ADA.

Lastly, you didn't say whether the stairs in question were inside the dwelling units, or in a common area.

As Mark Handler said, if you are working for the architect (or other design professional of record), you have to look at all the codes and regulations that are deemed applicable for the project, and then you have to meet or exceed all of those.  In practice, that means you have to select whichever applicable requirement is most stringent.

If you work for the building contractor and are not a design professional of record, it is typically not your responsibility to design the stair or handrails.  This should be a question that you ask the design professional.  That said, oftentimes the answer will be buried in a bunch of accessibility notes pasted onto the plans.

There are very few exceptions in the code where only one stair handrail is needed.  Typically it is only the interior of an individual dwelling unit, on a stairway that connects different floors within that unit, when that unit is either (a) privately funded, or (b) publicly funded, but not one of the minimum 5% and one-of-each-type of unit required by ADA or local codes to be accessible, or required by local codes to be adaptable.  Again, don't take our word for it, because there are many exceptions to the general statement in the last sentence, and we know almost nothing about your particular project.


----------



## ADAguy (Apr 5, 2021)

Best practice to have handrails on both sides, we don't wear swords anymore (smiling).


----------



## SH225 (Apr 5, 2021)

I think the real question is more exacting than best practice, the building code, or accessibility codes that include places of public accommodation. It's what the subject line of this thread calls _FHA Guideline vs. ANSI A117.1_. But it isn't one against the other. It's both. To those of us who design or build apartments, the relationship between these two documents is important.

See all the ANSI references on the page attached below from the FHADM.


----------



## Jean Tessmer-HI (Apr 6, 2021)

Yikes - Both private multi family and IRS tax credit affordable low income.  As far a codes go I am using the scoping set forth by congress to HUD in the 91 guidelines, then applying the appropriate requirements (ANSI A117.1 1986 which is the only authorized standard congress mandated to HUD becuase it was the only one in existance during the passage of the law and UFAS but it was not authorized through congress just using because HUD says so) outside of the modest intention for accessible housing from congress.  There are a lot of citations relating to the modest accessibility features congress wanted HUD to maintain.   The modest features are easier to understand if you read the comments and responses of HUD.  The State is Hawaii and our state building codes have removed chapter 11 and subplanted it with  an form that generally says to follow federal accessibility codes.  From the 91 guideline "
Response. In the preamble to the
proposed guidelines, the Department
stated in relevant part as follows:
"These guidelines are intended to
provide a safe harbor for compliance
with respect to those issues they cover.
Where the ANSI Standard is not
applicable, the language of the statute
itself is the safest guide. The degree of
scoping, accessibility, and the like are of
course limited by a principle of
reasonableness and cost." (55 FR 24371)
In House Report No. 711, the
accessibility requirements of the Fair
Housing Act were referred to by the
Congress as "modest" (House Report at
25), "minimal" and "basic features of
adaptability" (House Report at 25). In
developing the Fair Housing
Accessibility Guidelines, the
Department was attentive to the fact
that Congress viewed the Act's
accessibility requirements as
reasonable, and that the Guidelines for
these requirements should conform to
this "reasonableness" principle—that is,
that the Guidelines should provide the
level of reasonable accessibility
envisioned by Congress, while
maintaining the affordability of new
multifamily construction. The
Department believes that the final
Guidelines conform to this principle of
reasonableness and cost.


----------



## Jean Tessmer-HI (Apr 6, 2021)

SH225 said:


> I think the real question is more exacting than best practice, the building code, or accessibility codes that include places of public accommodation. It's what the subject line of this thread calls _FHA Guideline vs. ANSI A117.1_. But it isn't one against the other. It's both. To those of us who design or build apartments, the relationship between these two documents is important.
> 
> See all the ANSI references on the page attached below from the FHADM.


Thank you for the figure for steps.


----------



## Yikes (Apr 6, 2021)

Jean, if it is an IRS tax credit project (not LIHTC), then in addition to your local (Hawaii) codes, your attorney will likely tell you that you are subject to the 2010 ADA Standards for public housing, and you are subject to UFAS.  Your local building department will not check for compliance on this.  It is something that your investors will check (if they are smart), and of course you could be subject to a future ADA discrimination civil lawsuit if you do not comply.

You will need at least 5% of the units (and at least on of each type of unit that is provided on the project, e.g 1 bed/1 bath, 3 bed /2 bath) to be mobility accessible throughout the entire dwelling unit.  that means you will need the accessible units to be flats, no stairs inside the unit. There will also be specific parking requirements for those mobility units.  For example, if your project is providing at least one parking space per unit, then all of the mobility accessible units need their own accessible parking stall.  for the remainder of your private units, you would follow FHA.  See ADAS 208.2.3.1, 233.3.1, 233.3.4, , 804, 809 (including 809.2.1, etc.), 603, etc.

2010 ADAS is generally a safe harbor for UFAS, but their are a few exceptions.  The most notable one is that if you provide a common laundry room for use by the residents, than 100% of the washers and dryers need to be accessible; in other words, no stacking appliances.  See the document known as the HUD "Deeming Notice":
https://www.federalregister.gov/doc...in-federally-assisted-programs-and-activities


----------



## Jean Tessmer-HI (Apr 6, 2021)

Yikes, thank you for the great information.  I'm probably going to stick with the 91 Guidelines, and the ANSI A117.1 since that was the only one congress sanctioned in the Bill for HUD FHA Adaptive Housing Programs.  HUD has also deemed the 1986 ANSI A117.1 as providing compliance with FHA as long as you use the guidelines and q&a with it.  HUD is not allowed to tell us what to use or they will be in a position of telling me what rules to use like a county building code department and congress said they cannot do that.  The 91 Guidelines, and the ANSI A117.1 1986 are simpler for me to use and much easier to sort out the exact adaptive modest accessibility components HUD will be looking for from that text.   Thank you kindly for your generosity and help, I really appreciated it.


----------



## redeyedfly (Apr 7, 2021)

Jean Tessmer-HI said:


> Yikes, thank you for the great information.  I'm probably going to stick with the 91 Guidelines, and the ANSI A117.1 since that was the only one congress sanctioned in the Bill for HUD FHA Adaptive Housing Programs.  HUD has also deemed the 1986 ANSI A117.1 as providing compliance with FHA as long as you use the guidelines and q&a with it.  HUD is not allowed to tell us what to use or they will be in a position of telling me what rules to use like a county building code department and congress said they cannot do that.  The 91 Guidelines, and the ANSI A117.1 1986 are simpler for me to use and much easier to sort out the exact adaptive modest accessibility components HUD will be looking for from that text.   Thank you kindly for your generosity and help, I really appreciated it.


You're misunderstanding how Federal laws and rules work. HUD is authorized to create rules to administer the Fair Housing Act (The FHADM is one of them).  They have added many safe harbors in their rules since the law was passed, all within their authority granted by the act.  They recently added the 2009 ANSI/ICC A117.1 as a safe harbor.  You still need to follow both standards.  
HUD can absolutely tell you what to use under the Fair Housing Act.  In fact, whatever they tell you supersedes the AHJ if the AHJ has less stringent requirements.  I continually tell my architects that it doesn't matter if the AHJ waives an FHA requirement, the DOJ can still come after you with an enforcement action, you still have civil liability for depriving equal access.


----------



## Yikes (Apr 7, 2021)

Another way to say it is that local accessibility codes and federal accessibility standards are not _exclusive_ of each other.  They are _complementary_ to each other.  You attorney should not be telling you to "forget" what local code says vs. FHA says vs. ANSI 117.1 or vs. what ADAS says.
It's not either/or, it's both/and.

Your dwelling units have to comply with the most stringent requirements of both the local codes and FHA and (if it's public funded housing) ADAS.
In practice, that means that if one applicable code or regulation says provide a stair handrail on a minimum of one side of the stairs, and another applicable regulation says provide a stair handrail on both sides of the stairs, then you provide handrail on both sides of the stairs in order to satisfy all applicable requirements.  (BTW, I don't know of any code that says you must provide handrail on a _maximum_ of one side of a stair.)

And to be clear, your local building department will only enforce what is written in the local building code.  They are typically not authorized to plan check for regulations outside their jurisdiction; they will leave compliance up to you.  It's up to you to read FHA and ADAS and determine (1) if, their scope applies to your particular situation, and if so, then (2) how to satisfy both their technical requirements and the local building code.

I hope that explanation helps you to protect yourself from professional liability exposure.  Best wishes, Jean!


----------



## Jean Tessmer-HI (Apr 8, 2021)

Redeyedfly and Yikes - Thank you for your feed back and gracious help.  I really appreciate it.


----------



## ADAguy (Apr 9, 2021)

All excellent information to protect one's self from potential DOJ actions


----------



## Jean Tessmer-HI (May 8, 2021)

Yikes, I forgot to tell you that your 4/6/21 attachments and information is very valuable.  Thanks for your consideration and help.
Do you happen to know if FHA requires the owner to maintain the accessible features?  For instance have you ever come across an older facility to do work to upgrade it for FHA accessibility thats gotten worn out?  I know the ADA requires the features to be maintained.


----------



## Yikes (May 9, 2021)

First of all, keep in mind that the Fair Housing Act Design Manual is all about the design and construction of a building, not about the maintenance of a building.  The maintenance of a building is the responsibility of the owner.  In this particular case, you would do well at the end of the project to document (photograph) the installed features, and write a CYA letter stating that it is the responsibility of the owner to maintain the accessible features in accordance with applicable regulations.  (For what it's worth, some states are going to require the owner to sign a statement of maintenance that gets pasted onto the plan check set.  This is similar to agreeing to maintain stormwater compliance, etc.).

Second, design is just one part of the overall Fair Housing Act.  Fair housing includes things such as (for example) nondiscriminatory rental policies, which are the responsibility of the owner.

Thirdly, there can be unique situations where the tenant requests a "reasonable accommodation" to modify a building feature beyond FHADM requirements.
For example:

Your building code only requires handrail on one side for life-safety reasons, on a 3' wide stair that's inside an apartment unit.
Your federal accessibility regulation requires handrail on both sides.
You install handrail on both sides.
The tenant, who is extremely large, requests that one handrail be removed so that they have enough clear width to get up and down the stairs.
The owner can remove the handrail, and require that tenant to put money into an escrow account to re=install the handrail after that tenant terminates their lease.

Regarding my first statement, see page 2 of the FHA Design Manual:




Page 22:




Page 23 (cont'd)


----------



## ADAguy (May 10, 2021)

All good additional info. 

Jean, what is your role in this project?


----------



## Jean Tessmer-HI (Jul 28, 2021)

Yikes - its been a while and I have been integrating the information you provided.  In your April 5, 2021 you say "Yes, the project has to comply with FHA at a minimum, if it has 3+ units of rental housing or 4+ units of for-sale housing."  I could not find the reference to 3+ units defined for rental only.  That would be another significant amount of housing as it would apply to work force housing projects that I have seen being built with 3 or less units.  I was thinking up to three was not covered by the FHA?


----------



## ADAguy (Jul 29, 2021)

One of the groups best focused topics yet. Thank you all.


----------



## Jean Tessmer-HI (Jul 29, 2021)

I think so too.  FYI I wear a couple hats construction and interior design.  I am learning a lot.


----------



## ADAguy (Aug 1, 2021)

We never stop learning


----------



## Yikes (Aug 2, 2021)

Jean Tessmer-HI said:


> Yikes - its been a while and I have been integrating the information you provided.  In your April 5, 2021 you say "Yes, the project has to comply with FHA at a minimum, if it has 3+ units of rental housing or 4+ units of for-sale housing."  I could not find the reference to 3+ units defined for rental only.  That would be another significant amount of housing as it would apply to work force housing projects that I have seen being built with 3 or less units.  I was thinking up to three was not covered by the FHA?


I made an error in post #10 - - I accidentally quoted California Building Code 11A.
You are correct, FHA only covers 4 or more dwelling units.  California (where I live) took FHA a step further and defines "covered multifamily dwellings" as 3 or more apartments.  I apologize for quoting our own state code, when you asked about FHA.


----------



## Jean Tessmer-HI (Aug 3, 2021)

Yikes - thank you for getting back to me.  I just wanted to make sure I was not missing something written in tiny print somewhere in the FHA.
I am relieved.  Here is Hawaii we don't have an accessibility code.  Hawaii deleted that part of the IBC and amended it to read
Chapter 11 of the International Building Code is amended by deleting Chapter 11 and adding a new Chapter 11 to read as follows:

*CHAPTER 11 ACCESSIBILITY

1101 Scope.* Buildings or portions of buildings shall be accessible to persons with disabilities in accordance with the following regulations:

1. For construction of buildings or facilities of the State and County Governments, compliance with HRS 103-50, administered by the Disability and Communication Access Board, State of Hawaii.

2. Americans with Disabilities Act, administered and enforced by the U.S. Department of Justice.

3. Fair Housing Act, administered and enforced by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

4. Other pertinent laws relating with disabilities shall be administered and enforced by agencies responsible for their enforcement.

Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the owner (or the owner's representative, professional architect, or engineer) shall submit a statement that all requirements, relating to accessibility for persons with disabilities, shall be complied with.

(Ord. No. 3928, § 3, 2012)


----------



## Yikes (Aug 4, 2021)

That's the first time I've seen a municipality incorporate ADA and FHA by reference.
I note that they did not say "2010 ADA Standards" nor "Fair Housing Act Design Manual".
Because they did not get that specific, it makes sense that they would only ask for a written statement from the owner, rather than conducting a plan check for compliance.

Please note that as a designer, you only have the ability to design to the written, published requirements for the physical environment for the items under your scope of work.  

You do not have control over whether the owner will discriminate against someone in their housing management policy.
You do not have control over a maintenance person  putting a wastebasket into required clear floor space for a door.
Unless you are doing a post-construction, as-built topographic survey, you cannot guarantee that the contractor correctly provided the code compliant path-of-travel slopes that you had designed on your plans.
You do not have control over a future tree root that might push up some paving to a noncompliant slope, or slab edge or crack exceeding 0.25" vertical.
So, before you sign any statement on behalf of the owner, make sure that you appropriately limit the scope of the statement to the physical requirements that are under your control at time of permit issuance.


----------



## Jean Tessmer-HI (Aug 5, 2021)

Yikes,
Thank you for the tips all very good.  You are correct our building department only requires their form to be signed by the owner or owners authorized agent that the project will comply with the listed accessibility requirements.  The form repeats what I show above.  Thank you for your consideration and help.


----------



## Jean Tessmer-HI (Aug 5, 2021)

Yikes,
How do you do an as-built topographic survey?
I also thought more about your list and have a couple more to add.  I hope this fits with limiting scopes.

You do not have control over the property management company: repaving, re-striping, repairing, altering portions of the building, or replacing appliances.
You do not have control over selection of allowance items negotiated between the owner and the contractor such as but not limited to: hardware, or flooring (with transitions).
You do not have control over site settlement
You do not have control over physical deterioration of the building facility
Thanks again


----------



## Yikes (Aug 5, 2021)

Jean Tessmer-HI said:


> Yikes,
> How do you do an as-built topographic survey?
> I also thought more about your list and have a couple more to add.  I hope this fits with limiting scopes.
> 
> ...


When we are asked to sign or certify the accessibility, as we are often asked to do on tax credit projects, we state it simply:
_"As the architect of record for the above referenced project, I certify that the project as designed complies with the physical design requirements of the California Building Code, the 2010 ADA Standards, the Fair Housing Act Design Manual, and the Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards, including any written/published interpretations from the US Dept. of Justice as time of application for building permit.  This certification is limited solely to the designed scope of work shown in the construction documents.  It does not include any post-construction modifications to the approved/permitted construction documents that are not under the architect's scope of work."_

A statement like that basically excludes everything not explicitly shown on your plans.


----------



## Jean Tessmer-HI (Aug 6, 2021)

In case you are interested, Andersen windows manufactures a nearly perfect FHA sliding door track channel.   Its in their big door brochure.  Go to page 18 of the linked pdf.  You probably already have this.



			https://awwebcdnprdcd.azureedge.net/-/media/andersenwindows/files/multi-glide-documents/installationguide-9172917.pdf?modified=20170905142512G


----------



## ADAguy (Aug 6, 2021)

You hire a surveyor.


----------



## Yikes (Aug 10, 2021)

Jean Tessmer-HI said:


> In case you are interested, Andersen windows manufactures a nearly perfect FHA sliding door track channel.   Its in their big door brochure.  Go to page 18 of the linked pdf.  You probably already have this.
> 
> 
> 
> https://awwebcdnprdcd.azureedge.net/-/media/andersenwindows/files/multi-glide-documents/installationguide-9172917.pdf?modified=20170905142512G


Interesting.  In the image below (from page 6 of the brochure), what is the vertical distance between the arrows?


----------



## Jean Tessmer-HI (Aug 10, 2021)

Yikes - I used AutoCAD to find out as I have the factory drawings for this detail.  Sorry I cannot attach a pdf of it but I got 1/8" from the bottom of the door to the finished face of the finished floor as shown.  You arrows do not point exactly to the bottom of the door so I made an assumption on that position that you meant to point to the bottom face of the sliding door to the finished floor surface..  I guess you realize if this door is not installed in an interior area and is installed as an exterior door, you would need address additional water proofing or use Andersens lift and slide doors which does provide the wind, rain, and structural performance required by AAMA or WDMA.  Andersen also has the hardware but it has to be order through Andersen from CRL (external door pulls).  They say the force required to operate the latch is within ADA compliance. 
Hope this helps.


----------



## Yikes (Aug 10, 2021)

ADAguy said:


> You hire a surveyor.


To be specific, the surveyor would have to gather elevation points every 2' on center in every direction on paths-of-travel, and they survey accuracy should be within 1/100th of a foot.
Then you would ask the surveyor to identify any slopes that exceed ADA standards, so that you don't have to be the one that does all the math.
That can get very expensive on a large site.


----------



## Jean Tessmer-HI (Aug 10, 2021)

Thanks for letting me know.  I as hoping there was a 3d camera or Lidar camera you used to determine the finished placed slope, with one click.  Here's a bit of history, the original research method of measurement was done on 18" increments (later they found the 24" protractor level was as good) using an 18" protractor vile level which had about a .5 degree accuracy or about 0.9%.  It really depended on how many cross hairs they had between each whole degree and having really good eyesight.   The Smarttool has 0.3 degrees of accuracy up or down about 0.5% rise per foot about 1/16".  I have tried a lot of digital levels none come close.  Some of the better manufacturers were up to 1% off.  I think because of the accelorometer.   I believe 1/100th of one foot is 0.12 inches or 1/8" per foot.   An eighth of and in per foot rise = 1%.  All the slopes would have needed to be designed and placed at 1% less than the maximum allowed to try to make sure it got built to be a little under the maximums.   The precision bias of the Smarttool has been accepted in Federal court as de minimis.   The dip stick used for super flat floors uses the Smarttool Pro 3600 to calibrate against.  It can read down to 0.15 degrees per foot.  It uses a gravity based sensor.  Been around since 1987 the collection of the history of this invention is kept at the Smithsonian National Musemum of American History Kenneth E. Behring Center.


----------



## Jean Tessmer-HI (Aug 18, 2021)

Can anyone let me know where to find in the Fhag the requirement of 100% USPS cbu's be accessible between 15 and 54 inches.  I see that parking for covered units only needs to be at 2%.  Is the accessible parking supposed to match the 100% or masybe 100% of the covered units?  The only reference I could find is access to mailbox area in the FHAG 2 Table "Basic Components for Accessible and Usable public and Common Use Areas or Facilities page 9505 item 14. mailbox areas.  If this is the only reference does it mean the swimming pools and playgrounds will also need lifts and ramps to be 100% accessible?


----------



## hughdint (Aug 18, 2021)

Jean Tessmer-HI said:


> I was told by an attorney to forget all the requirements in the 1991 guidelines and the Design Manual.   He said the guidelines lowers accessibility i could have problems later on.  He said because HUD refers to ANSI A117.1 so when there are words not defined we are supposed to defer to the ANSI Standard and use that to fill in the blanks.  Is this what other contractors are finding out?  This would be for FHA covered dwellings and FHA tax credit funded housing.
> 
> Is there a comparison between FHA Guidelines and the ANSI A117.1 1986?
> Which one allowed only one handrail down steps?
> ...


AMNAL but it is my understanding that if you use a safe harbor code (which could be ANSI 2003 or ANSI 2009 you are still complying with the Fair Housing ACT (the law not the guidelines). The law says:


> (4) Compliance with the appropriate requirements of the American National Standard for buildings and facilities providing
> accessibility and usability for physically handicapped people (commonly cited as "ANSI A117.1") suffices to satisfy the
> requirements of paragraph (3)(C)(iii).


The requirements of paragraph (3)(C)(iii) are:


> (C) in connection with the design and construction of covered multifamily dwellings for first occupancy after the
> date that is 30 months after the date of enactment of the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988, a failure to
> design and construct those dwelling in such a manner that--
> (i) the public use and common use portions of such dwellings are readily accessible to and usable by
> ...


Theoretically, based on the above any state accessibility law that addresses the points indicated above (surely any version of ANSI or UFAS does this) could be considered a method to comply with the Fair Housing Act. In practice it is best to use one of the ten codes that have actually been declared "safe havens" 

I would check which Accessibility Code has been adopted by your state and use that, unless it is not a safe haven, then I would use a code that is.


----------



## Jean Tessmer-HI (Aug 18, 2021)

Hi Hughdint - my state and local county have deleted all references to accessibility and amended our code to state that we are required to follow all federal codes.


----------



## redeyedfly (Aug 19, 2021)

Jean Tessmer-HI said:


> Can anyone let me know where to find in the Fhag the requirement of 100% USPS cbu's be accessible between 15 and 54 inches.  I see that parking for covered units only needs to be at 2%.  Is the accessible parking supposed to match the 100% or masybe 100% of the covered units?  The only reference I could find is access to mailbox area in the FHAG 2 Table "Basic Components for Accessible and Usable public and Common Use Areas or Facilities page 9505 item 14. mailbox areas.  If this is the only reference does it mean the swimming pools and playgrounds will also need lifts and ramps to be 100% accessible?


HUD provided an opinion on this issue in 2008 in a letter to the USPS.  HUD still enforces this opinion.  Note that if your local AHJ uses more recent versions of A117.1 you may be restricted to 15"-48".  Yes, that makes your mail room much larger.  
I believe HUD's interpretation is not correct and actually makes the mailboxes LESS accessible.  They are assuming incorrectly that accessibility is only concerned with people in wheelchairs.  The reality is that many more people suffer from mobility impairments related to their lower back which makes bending over to see what's in your mailbox, even at 48" very difficult.  2%, not less than the number of Type A or Accessible units within reach range is certainly a more appropriate interpretation.  Certainly the mailbox area must be accessible FHADM, but each mailbox is part of the unit and should follow the Operable Parts requirements for that type of unit in my opinion.  



			https://www.fairhousingnc.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/USPS-Infanger-5-20-08.pdf


----------



## Jean Tessmer-HI (Aug 19, 2021)

Redeyedfly, thank you very much for the Infanger letter.  I think there is some misinterpretation by HUD.  Item 14 says "mail box area"  not mail boxes.  
From the text of the table for Requirement 2- item 14. Common-use spaces and facilities (including swimming pools, playgrounds, entrances, rental offices, lobbies, elevators, mailbox areas, lounges, halls and corridors, and the like.)  

I guess my question is why aren't swimming pools, playgrounds, all rental offices in the same location, all public restrooms in the same location, also 100% in compliance with 4.1 to 4.30 FHAG or even why aren't all the parking stalls accessible (they are scoped at 2%).  I have not gotten any answers yet.

The USPS is not currently following the FHAG they are following their own standard called POSTAL SERVICE 39 CFR Part 254 USPS Standards for Facility Accessibility - STANDARDS FOR FACILITY ACCESSIBILITY Handbook RE-4 March 2005.  Their standards also covered the safety of their mail carriers and provided ergonomically safe positions for the mail carrier to deliver mail to interior and exterior cluster boxes.   If we don't follow USPS we don't get mail.  USPS has said that the CBU's and Licensed manufactured interior USPS boxes are USPS federal property.  

Definition of area =
area
[ˈerēə]

NOUN

a region or part of a town, a country, or the world.
"rural areas of New Jersey" · 
[more]
synonyms:
district · region · zone · sector · quarter · locality · locale · neighborhood·
[more]
the extent or measurement of a surface or piece of land.
"the area of a triangle" · 
[more]
synonyms:
expanse · extent · size · scope · compass · measurements · dimensions · proportions · square footage · acreage
a subject or range of activity or interest.
"the key areas of science"
synonyms:
domain · sector · department · province · territory · compartment · line · field · sphere · discipline · realm
a sunken enclosure giving access to the basement of a building.
"a bicycle padlocked to the area railing"


----------



## redeyedfly (Aug 19, 2021)

Jean Tessmer-HI said:


> I think there is some misinterpretation by HUD.  Item 14 says "mail box area"  not mail boxes.
> From the text of the table for Requirement 2- item 14. Common-use spaces and facilities (including swimming pools, playgrounds, entrances, rental offices, lobbies, elevators, mailbox areas, lounges, halls and corridors, and the like.)


I agree 100%.  HUD got it wrong on both intent and practical effect.

I encourage you to add your complaints to HUD.


----------



## ADAguy (Sep 5, 2021)

great discussion gang. it remains to be found in court which is acceptable and in which district


----------



## redeyedfly (Oct 4, 2021)

ADAguy said:


> great discussion gang. it remains to be found in court which is acceptable and in which district


HUD covers the entire country.  And this has been litigated, HUD wins.


----------



## Jean Tessmer-HI (Oct 4, 2021)

FYI - the National Home Builders Association NHBA is very aware of how HUD sues small contractors.  Sometimes 8 DOJ attorneys to one small contractor.
My recommendation is to use just the essential statutory regulations the FHAG 1991 with the 1994 supplement Q&A and the ANSI A117.1 1986.  Write those sources as the limits of your contract.  Some of you may not be able to use those sources if your AHJ has adopted a different FHA safe harbor.


----------



## mark handler (Oct 7, 2021)

Jean Tessmer-HI said:


> I was told by an attorney to forget all the requirements in the 1991 guidelines and the Design Manual.   He said the guidelines lowers accessibility i could have problems later on.  He said because HUD refers to ANSI A117.1 so when there are words not defined we are supposed to defer to the ANSI Standard and use that to fill in the blanks.  Is this what other contractors are finding out?  This would be for FHA covered dwellings and FHA tax credit funded housing.
> 
> Is there a comparison between FHA Guidelines and the ANSI A117.1 1986?
> Which one allowed only one handrail down steps?
> ...


*Building Code 2018 of Hawaii*​*Chapter 11 Accessibility* does refer to *Fair Housing Act*s design and construction requirements
it *does not* refer to ANSI117.1

*IMPO, Both are minimum accessibility requirements*.  The goal is not to meet the minimum code requirements, but to exceed them.


----------



## ADAguy (Oct 7, 2021)

tbz said:


> The feds just updated last month the new Safe Harbor allowances for HUD
> 
> Here is the link to the federal registry
> 
> ...


Thank you for this


----------



## ADAguy (Oct 14, 2021)

Jean Tessmer-HI said:


> Can anyone let me know where to find in the Fhag the requirement of 100% USPS cbu's be accessible between 15 and 54 inches.  I see that parking for covered units only needs to be at 2%.  Is the accessible parking supposed to match the 100% or masybe 100% of the covered units?  The only reference I could find is access to mailbox area in the FHAG 2 Table "Basic Components for Accessible and Usable public and Common Use Areas or Facilities page 9505 item 14. mailbox areas.  If this is the only reference does it mean the swimming pools and playgrounds will also need lifts and ramps to be 100% accessible?


How many access suits/attorneys do you have in HI?


----------



## Jean Tessmer-HI (Oct 14, 2021)

My understanding it that the DOJ does not enforce the rules and regulations for the design and construction of CBU only the US Postal Service has that control.  The US Access Board has enforcement of accessibility by way of the ABA over all Federal Agencies.  Not the DOJ.


----------

