An In-depth Review of the Buildings Accessibility Act and RegulationsBuilding Accessibility Advisory Board, March 2004 Contents
BackgroundIn March 2000 the provincial government of Newfoundland and Labrador appointed members to a Building Accessibility Advisory Board (BAAB) as per Section 18 of the Building Accessibility Act (O.C. 96-865). The appointees included representatives of government, the architectural design/engineering sector, legal counsel, as well as a number of members of persons with disabilities. The role of this board was to advise the Minister on the application of the Building Accessibility Act and Regulations, and specifically in this instance to undertake a comprehensive review of the legislation with a view to identifying and recommending specific changes. The legislation in question is over 20 years old and it was felt a review was necessary in order to reflect current needs of the disabled community, both from the perspective of new building design and technology, but also to recognize the increased number of people with some form of disability including the growing number of seniors. Since the appointment of the initial board in 2000, there have been a number of membership changes but in general the board has maintained consistent representation of persons with disabilities including mobility impaired, visually impaired and hearing impaired, and a member of the Coalition of Persons With Disabilities (COD). The members responsible for this report are:
Mr. Robert Osmond, P. Eng.
Ms. Cecilia Carroll
Ms. Marie White
Mr. Rick Turner
Mr. Randy Hawkins
Mr. Guy Perry
Mr. Brian Winsor
Mr. Leon Mills
Ms. Michelle Craig, P.Eng. MethodologyThe committee has met on a regular basis during the past two years and has undertaken a line by line review of the Building Accessibility Act and Regulations. The review included comparison of our existing legislation with that of other regions of Canada. Also, various groups representing the disabled community were written and invited to provide comments and input into the process. Detailed tables in Appendices A and B reflect the various recommended changes to both the Act and Regulations. Included in this table, as well, is the rationale for each recommendation made by the Board. Several sections of the Act and Regulations warranted more discussion than others and could not be resolved in a single definitive recommended change. These items can be found in Section 3.0 of this report. General discussion from the group has been included in each item. Section 4.0 addresses areas of the Act where it is felt that drafting of additional provisions need to occur. It was suggested by the advisory board that these be in the form of internal policy manuals. Discussion ItemsGroup F OccupanciesSection 6.(1), Buildings Accessibility Regulations, 1992The committee discussed this item at great length. Some of the main points that were made included the potential cost and safety implications if the Buildings Accessibility Act was revised to require that all facilities be registered under the Act. Currently, if an application is made for a Group F building, it is automatically granted an exemption. Some arguments were made that these applications should be given more scrutiny to determine if some portion of the facility could be made accessible. This review could then be based on the functionality of the building and potential safety concerns with making the facility accessible. 50 % RuleSection 9.(2), Buildings Accessibility Regulations, 1992As with the Group F occupancies, Section 9 "Reconstructions and Additions" of the Buildings Accessibility Regulations generated much discussion. Most of the discussion was centred around whether or not 50% of the replacement cost of a building was a suitable point at which a building should require registration. Another concern raised was that current legislation does not require that the existing building be upgraded outside the scope of the proposed renovation work to accommodate the new work. For example, consider a school where a new wing extension has been proposed. The school is prior to 1981 and therefore qualifies for an exemption but it has been requested that the new extension be fully accessible in its design. The conflict is now between an inaccessible entrance and washroom facilities in the older section of the building and a fully accessible section in the newer portion of the building. While the committee did not specify a new percentage that should dictate registration of a building or facility, it was decided that this area of the regulations warranted further review and discussion. Some items to be considered in the review would be potential cost implications with requiring accessibility of a facility and any retrofitting that would need to be undertaken to ensure that the renovations would meet the intent of the Act. It was also suggested that projects undertaking major renovations be further scrutinized to determine what areas in the existing building could be easily upgraded to meet accessibility requirements and these changes indicated to the owner or agent prior to review of the drawings. It may be possible at this early stage to include this additional work with minimal cost in the renovations and greatly increase accessibility of the entire facility. Publicly-owned buildingsThis item was addressed by the Buildings Accessibility Legislative Review Committee in January 1988. The views of the current committee have not changed and are reiterated by this committee. Quoted directly from the 1988 report, "Over the years, and throughout the Committee's review of the legislation, many people and groups have expressed the concern that many existing government buildings, buildings leased by government departments and schools, are not accessible. While the Committee appreciates the difficulty of legislating that buildings erected prior to the Act retroactively be made accessible, we, nonetheless, believe that government has a responsibility to attempt to have important services located in accessible facilities. It is important for government to lead the way to ensure accessibility. The matter of schools is of particular concern and we encourage that all reasonable efforts be made by school boards to work toward accessible design, even in existing schools. This is particularly important in small communities where schools are often the centre of community activity." Residential ConstructionAs the current Buildings Accessibility Act and Regulations are intended for public buildings, it is the recommendation of this advisory board that a separate document be developed to address the issues of accessibility in a residence. It was also suggested that members of the contracting industry, ie: house designers, contractors, and planners, be approached to develop the guidelines and technical design standards required. This would remain as a separate document from the Buildings Accessibility Act and Regulations, but could be adopted in its design of apartment and condominium buildings. Policy GuidelinesDaycaresThe "Centre-Based Child Care Policy Document" currently in use by the Department of Health and Community Services, and referenced in the review process at the Government Service Centre, should be included in Section 3.0 "Codes and Standards". All items concerning building accessibility, including access to the outdoor play space, will then be adequately addressed. Personal Care HomesThe "Policy Directive Manual Governing Personal Care Homes" currently in use by the Department of Health and Community Services, and referenced in the review process at the Government Service Centre, should be included in Section 3.0 "Codes and Standards". All items outside those requirements currently in the Buildings Accessibility Act and Regulations (ratio of number of accessible bedrooms and requirements for strobe lighting) will then be adequately addressed. HospitalsFacilities that have been determined to be inadequately addressed in the current Buildings Accessibility Act and Regulations are hospitals and medical facilities. While generally being applicable in most sections of the technical guidelines of Schedule "A", individual design items such as patient rooms (complete with washrooms) and specific function rooms (tub and shower rooms) need more specific guidelines. Positioning of grab bars, for example, becomes specific for the use of the room. Furniture and fixture placement are other items that become critical to determining whether a patient room can serve its designated purpose. Based on the many functions and services that a hospital is designed to address, the advisory board recommends that policy guidelines be developed specifically for a "hospital-type" environment. SchoolsSchools, especially primary and elementary levels, do not fit into the technical design standards indicated under the current Buildings Accessibility Act and Regulations. Accommodations must be made in areas such as washroom design, in particular sink and toilet heights and centreline spacing, and counter and drinking fountain heights for children of this age group. As a result, the Buildings Accessibility Advisory Board recommends that a policy manual be developed to allow design review staff some flexibility in plan review and approvals. Departmental InterpretationsCurrently, there are 24 interpretations to the Buildings Accessibility Act and Regulations in use by design review staff. When a design is submitted and the design review technician is unsure whether the proposed design meets the intent of the Act, a "Request for Interpretation" is made to the Director based on the specific section of the Act that is being questioned. These interpretations are then circulated to the technical staff to aid in their review. The Building Accessibility Advisory Board recommends that a control system be developed to ensure that these departmental interpretations are issued in a timely manner to the design industry. Conclusions and RecommendationsIn summary, the committee recommends the following:
Mr. Robert Osmond, P. Eng. Ms. Cecilia Carroll Ms. Marie White Mr. Rick Turner Mr. Randy Hawkins Mr. Guy Perry Mr. Brian Winsor Mr. Leon Mills Ms. Michelle Craig, P.Eng. Appendix AAn Evaluation of the Buildings Accessibility Act
Appendix BAn Evaluation of the Buildings Accessibility Regulations under the Buildings Accessibility Act (O.C. 96-865) Consolidated Newfoundland Regulation 1140/96
|