Re: Elevators and exclusions
From: Tim Mensch (
Date: Mon, 12 May 2008 14:04:27 -0700 (PDT)
melanie griffin wrote:
This might be a somewhat misleading post....If the common house comes within
the jurisdiction of the ADA or an even more restrictive local code, there
may NOT be a choice.
Just to clarify: I'm not talking about avoiding ADA or other local requirements, because as Melanie points out, that's not an option. However, that's not what we're (or at least what everyone is) talking about--folks on the list were objecting to the concept of a common house with ground-level entrances on two floors and no elevator, which apparently satisfies ADA: The WildSage common house was built with no elevator, for instance, without violating any ADA rules--since there IS access to both floors (though not to the hot tub, it turns out). You just can't change floors without going outside (and the long way around to the back of the building) if you're in a wheelchair. At Pleasant Hill cohousing, there's a second floor with NO handicapped access whatsoever (which includes only the guest rooms, guest bathroom, and an underutilized "teen room"), though they were required (if I understand it correctly--wasn't there for the design process myself) to put an equally-featured handicapped-accessible bathroom on the main floor, so the main floor bathroom includes a full shower with seat.

As to local zoning restrictions (and for that matter, local interpretation of the ADA): Every community-in-planning certainly needs to do that homework themselves.


Tim Mensch

Currently at Wild Sage (Boulder, CO):

Founding member of Tumblerock, a Boulder, CO area community in its forming 

Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.