Nonprofit disabled coalition has convinced many valley businesses to comply with law

Martin Kuz

Friday, Oct. 1, 1999 | 3:03 a.m.

Nevadans for Equal Access sued the owner and manager of a Las Vegas office park Thursday for alleged violation of the American with Disabilities Act, the latest legal salvo in the group's battle with area businesses over federal accessibility laws.

The nonprofit disabled advocacy coalition filed suit against Quail Park IV, proprietor of an office complex of the same name at 2810 W. Charleston Blvd. The Riberio Corp., manager of the office park, is named as a co-defendant.

NEA officials charge that the Quail complex lacks sufficient handicapped parking, safe pathways from sidewalks onto the premises and adequate curb cuts to provide entry into buildings.

NEA has prodded more than 60 Las Vegas businesses into ADA compliance since 1993, filing lawsuits against about one-third of them to bring about adherence. Group spokesman Paul Martin said Quail Park and Riberio officials agreed to modify the property to ADA standards after he wrote to them 10 months ago, but subsequently took no action.

During a Thursday press conference outside the Quail complex, Martin said he also plans to send a letter regarding ADA compliance to the Nevada headquarters of Wendy's restaurants. The group's beef with the fast-food chain's Las Vegas outlets is the serpentine aisle that leads up to the cash register, a design feature that impedes wheelchair-bound customers, Martin said.

In addition, Martin intends to notify the state Department of Motor Vehicles about what NEA officials regard as inadequate handicapped parking at the agency's building off Carey Avenue in North Las Vegas. Lawsuits could follow if Wendy's or the DMV fails to redress the alleged violations, he said.

Martin, who suffers from muscular dystrophy and uses a wheelchair, said in an interview earlier this week that it's long past due for business owners to abide by the ADA. The law, passed by Congress in 1990, guarantees the disabled equal access to and accommodations in public and commercial buildings.

"Years ago I used to think that the lack of compliance was because of property owners' unawareness. But the ADA is nine years old now," Martin said. "Now, I think it's just the attitude of property owners: 'Well, we'll wait and see if anybody sues' or 'We don't want to spend the money.' "

Quail Park and Riberio officials declined comment on the lawsuit Thursday.

The legal clash over Quail Park serves as a microcosm of the larger, ongoing dilemma of Las Vegas businesses complying with the ADA.

Disabled advocates allow that local building officials and business owners have shown greater respect for the ADA the last two years. But they add that a sluggish bureaucratic response to the ADA mandate for most of the 1990s sired both an ignorance about and resistance to the law that only recently has begun to wear off.

Much of the problem stems from past disparities between the ADA and the uniform building code used by the city of Las Vegas and Clark County.

Individual local governments must adopt the uniform building code, which compresses into a single document the standards of a handful of federal building boards.

Until its latest revision in 1997, the code contained access specifications far less stringent that those stipulated in the ADA. The significance: Then as now, city and county building departments only apply the code in approving building permits.

In other words, despite the ADA's passage in 1990 and a trigger date for compliance that kicked in three years later, the code trumps federal law for local building departments.

That's because the ADA, as a civil rights act, falls under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Justice Department. Any attempt to interpret or enforce the ADA would expose local agencies to liability, according to Bob Weber, director of the county's building department.

Two years ago city and county officials, with an eye toward accessibility laws, adopted federal revisions to the building code that tightened the gap between that document and the ADA. But by then, Las Vegas had boomed. Thousands of commercial buildings -- strip malls and convenience stores in particular -- were constructed under the looser guidelines found in the code's previous versions.

As a result, there are commercial structures aplenty in Clark County that come nowhere near ADA compliance, said Suzanne Thomas of the Governor's Committee on Employment of People with Disabilities, a state agency. Thomas said typical deficiencies include properties with no handicapped parking, no ramps leading up to entrances or no curb cuts on sidewalks.

Another common flaw concerns safe access to a building's entrance. Business owners were under no obligation before the 1997 code changes to provide a pathway into their building that avoided the parking lot.

The ADA, in essence, requires a route for the disabled to access a building free of motor vehicle traffic. But because structures built prior to 1997 met code specifications at the time, the only way to compel owners to now comply with the ADA is to ask them.

Or to sue them, said Barbara Buckley, executive director of Clark County Legal Services, which handles ADA litigation for Martin's group.

"The city and county have no role in forcing compliance. It's up to private individuals and the Justice Department," Buckley said.

Buckley and Thomas said with the building code hewing closer to the ADA the last two years, commercial structures erected during that span generally have met the law's standard. Moreover, further revisions to the uniform building code expected by 2001 will help put local building departments in virtual lockstep with the ADA in terms of structural accessibility, Weber said.

In the meantime, disabled advocates argue, government agencies need to alert business owners to the somewhat complicated differences between the building code and the ADA. Too often, building permit applicants remain oblivious that following the code can still leave them in violation of federal law, Thomas said.

"When owners take their plans to the city or county to get the OK to build, they think they're in compliance with the laws out there. And that's simply not the case," she said.

Ronald Ray Smith, a technical consultant to the nonprofit Disabled Rights Action Committee, said business owners "think a building permit is a license from God. They don't realize that it doesn't put them in (ADA) compliance."

Weber countered that, on matters ranging from parking spaces to wheelchair ramps to door width, negligible discrepancies exist between the building code and the ADA.

"In general, unless you're a technical expert, unless you're looking for a problem, you're not going to have a difference between the two. You're going to have pretty similar accommodations as far as accessibility," he said.

Paul Wilkins, director of the Las Vegas building and safety department, noted that the city's handicapped parking standards for new buildings exceed ADA requirements. He also noted that agency officials stamp a warning on all permits reminding property owners that adhering to the building code does not indemnify them against ADA violations.

Wilkins concedes there is no means of applying the revised building code on properties constructed before 1997 -- unless owners decide to remodel or expand a structure.

In that case, the city will issue a permit only after an owner agrees to a fixed schedule for bringing the property into compliance with the current code. The timeline gives smaller companies with fewer resources a chance to spread the cost of retrofitting a property -- adding curb cuts, for instance, or reconfiguring a parking lot -- over a period of years, he said.

"A lot of strip malls were built for a long time that wouldn't be considered ADA compliant because of what the code used to be," Wilkins said. "But if you're going to do any remodeling, you're going to have to agree that you'll get the building up to speed."

Wilkins said owners understand the relationship between the building code and the ADA better than they did even two years ago. They also realize that redrawing a couple of lines on a blueprint costs considerably less than retrofitting a standing structure, he said.

If plain ignorance qualifies as the primary reason business owners shirk the ADA, however, disabled advocates insist that too many other companies simply balk at shelling out $200 to put up handicapped parking signs or $1,500 to install a wheelchair ramp.

Martin points to Tiffany Square, a 10-shop strip mall at 4163 S. Maryland Parkway owned by J.A. Tiberti Construction. He argues that the absence of handicapped parking and access ramps in front of the center, built more than 20 years ago, violates the ADA. There are two handicapped parking spots behind the building, where a sloped entrance leads to a covered walkway that connects to the front sidewalk.

Three of the center's tenants, who asked not to be named for fear of getting evicted, asserted that Tiberti officials have dismissed their requests to provide handicapped parking and accessibility for mall customers.

"It's only a matter of time before someone gets hurt and sues," one store owner said.

Earlier this week Jacqueline Kelley, 74, pulled her car into a spot in front of Tiffany Square even though she has a handicapped parking permit. Kelley, who is recovering from a broken hip and suffers from severe arthritis, held a cane in each hand as she stiffly shuffled up the two front steps.

"It's too far to walk from the back. I don't like having to go up the stairs, but it's closer than" parking in the handicapped spots, she said. "It's a nightmare to get up here."

Tiberti officials declined comment on Tiffany Square. Martin intends to write to the company about the alleged ADA violations.

Martin said businesses looking to save a fistful of dollars by ducking the ADA -- beyond spurning the patronage of disabled customers -- run the risk of losing quite a bit more.

"With some concrete and a couple buckets of paint, they could be in compliance," he said. "If they don't get into compliance, someone is going to sue them because of an injury, and they're going to pay through the nose for that."

Tony Illia, spokesman for Associated General Contractors of Las Vegas, a construction contractors trade group, said business owners would be wise to retrofit their property before an accident occurs.

"Not all property owners take (the ADA) into account or realize it could be an issue they'll be liable for, and they should," he said.

It's when companies refuse to acknowledge the ADA's validity that disabled advocates press the issue. Nevadans for Equal Access has successfully sued Binion's Horseshoe, Las Vegas Motor Speedway and the Fashion Show Mall, among others. The Disabled Rights Action Committee is suing Coast Resorts Inc., the Hard Rock Cafe and Harrah's Entertainment Inc.

Two weeks ago the Justice Department reached a settlement with the MGM Grand that guarantees full compliance with the ADA, the first such agreement signed by a Las Vegas hotel-casino.

"We're not trying to force people to do things," Martin said. "We just want them to abide by the letter of the law."

archive