Reacting to Violations of the Fair Housing Act (The Angle)

Reacting to Violations of the Fair Housing Act

The U.S. Fair Housing Act was originally enacted in 1968 to prohibit discrimination in the provision of housing due to race or color, religion, sex, national origin, familial status, or disability. The legislation targets direct providers of housing, such as landlords and real estate companies, as well as other entities like municipalities, banks and other lending institutions, and homeowners’ insurance companies whose discriminatory practices may make housing unavailable to particular groups.

There has often been confusion and inconsistency with the implementation and enforcement of the Fair Housing Act across the country. Though enacted in 1968, regulations to enforce the Act were not drafted by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) until the late 1980s and early 1990s. HUD’s own regulations are at times inconsistent, making education on the rules to direct providers difficult. To add to the confusion, the Department of Justice, which enforces the regulations, often has interpreted the policies differently than HUD.

In recent months, the AIA has received an increasing number of reports of architects being targeted for violations or potential violations of the Fair Housing Act, particularly in regards to accessibility. Are you aware of these situations? In your opinion, what can the AIA do, both to prevent future violations as well as to help those who currently find themselves in this precarious circumstance?

Tell us what you think.

Posted by AIA Government Affairs on November 8, 2007 11:54 AM | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://blog.aia.org/mt-tb.cgi/374

Comments (15)

Anne Marie Ellis:

Honestly, if Architects are not being held to design to the codes they are legally required to design to, they should be heavily fined. Not only does it "hurt" the professionals that do design correctly, but it also hurts those with disabilities, however major or minor.

Posted by Anne Marie Ellis | November 8, 2007 5:29 PM

Posted on November 8, 2007 17:29

Drake Wauters:

I know a great deal of architects who will not work on multi-family projects in large part because the accessibility rules are very poorly structured and difficult to comply with. It's not fair to blame the architects when the web of interrelated and conflicting codes and regulation grows deeper every year. I know no architect who would intentionally disregard accessibility rules and laws. The AIA should demand major improvements to the accessibility regulation wording and diagrams.

Posted by Drake Wauters | November 8, 2007 7:26 PM

Posted on November 8, 2007 19:26

Donald:

Oh ...and since we are on the subject of accessibility, this one is rich. Bill Richardson, Democrat candidate for president, says that obese Americans should be brought under the protection of the Americans for Disabilities Act. He says that this falls under the category of "basic civil rights." Pushing for obese people to be protected by the A.D.A. would mean that oversight on such matters as hiring and firing would belong to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. So much for businesses offering incentives for your weight loss ... that would discriminate! We don't NEED research on obesity. Why do we have to spend millions upon millions of taxpayer dollars to figure out that people become lard asses by not exercising and eating too much of the wrong foods? Your tax dollars at work ladies and gentlemen! And we wonder why the ADA is hurting Architecture? Big Government involvement only means a Bigger Mess to come for the future of Architecture with future leaders like this?

Posted by Donald | November 9, 2007 5:35 AM

Posted on November 9, 2007 05:35

Casey Frazier:

The codes are complex, and often have multiple interpretations, such as the three different ways to define a clear floor space for a dishwasher. Architects should know the code(s), and more importantly interns should know the code(s). I know it’s a lot like reading a VCR manual and your boss wanted that ramp drawn yesterday, but seriously read the code! However when I call up FHA and can't get a straight answer on the adaptability of residential elevators then I feel like there is a real problem, a problem that is bigger than any one person or agency. One more things, the Fair Housing Act doesn't deal with accessibility, it deals with adaptability. Accessibility is dealt with under ANSI. I know it sounds like I'm splitting hairs but when it comes to codes, choose your words carefully.

Posted by Casey Frazier | November 9, 2007 8:57 AM

Posted on November 9, 2007 08:57

Jim Pettit:

Drake Wauters hit the nail on the head. Because of our extensive knowledge of the ADA, the Fair Housing Act and design for the disabled, my firm has been asked on a number of occasions to survey existing apartment complexes for compliance with the Fair Housing Act and the ADA. This is far more difficult than one might expect precisely for the reasons that Mr. Wauters expresses. The liberal and more forgiving Fair Housing regulations fall short of making apartments truly accessible for the disabled. For those of us schooled in the values and intent of the ADA and ADAAG we are often faced with the dilemma of designing what we know to work versus following the quirky standards of the Fair Housing Act and the interpretations of the officials who enforce them. If ADAAG -- imperfect as it may be -- were adopted as the accessibility standard for all units covered under the Fair Housing Act, there would be less confusion on the part of owners, better access for the disabled and far fewer reasons for architects to shy away from this type of work.

Posted by Jim Pettit | November 9, 2007 9:17 AM

Posted on November 9, 2007 09:17

Artsy:

Developers sometimes sell units and parking spaces that are dedicated by the architect to be for ADA use to people who have no right to those units or parking spaces. Who is responsible in this case? The Architect, The Developer or the housing commitee? Does the housing commitee become the responsible party for not acting if it allows the resale of those units to people who are not eligable for those hadicap units and spaces?

Posted by Artsy | November 9, 2007 9:30 AM

Posted on November 9, 2007 09:30

Dale Stephens:

I have served as an expert in countless law suits involving both the FHA and ADA. I have found that the ignorance of architects about these laws to be amazing. I fault the Federal Government and namely the Congress for constructing legislation with unforseen negative consequences. They have done a lousy job of informing the construction industry of the requirements of these legislative horrors that only enrich the lawyers that specialize in this area.

Posted by Dale Stephens | November 9, 2007 11:00 AM

Posted on November 9, 2007 11:00

ron witteveen:

The fha/hud documents should be rendered obsolete - even though they have nice graphics - as, at least here in California - chap 11A of the CBC covers such requirements. Besides, the CBC has been (and i believe still is for the 2007 CBC) a 'safe harbor document' covering all the requirements of the fha/hud regulations anyway.

Posted by ron witteveen | November 9, 2007 4:36 PM

Posted on November 9, 2007 16:36

Judi Miller:

I have practiced residential architecture for 24 years and have dealt with accessibility as a potential legal issue since 1990. I would like to see the AIA persuade HUD/DOJ into requiring the same level of responsibility of a design professional by a standard of care versus a civil discrimination suit. I think if accessibility issues/problems were viewed with the same standard as any other code issue then this could solve many problems with frivolous lawsuits. This does not in anyway reduce the responsibility of the design professional. It simply provides a reasonable view for some standards that are confusing at best to be viewed with what another architect or engineer would do in similar circumstances. The professionals who are responsible for designing buildings will not be as reluctant to work on projects with fears that they could be sued by someone from whom they do not have a contract with and for an indefinite amount of time. I would also like to see the AIA spearhead a universal accessibility standard that is reasonable for use in a residential setting that would remain the standard regardless of the type of financing, the locale and would apply to both private as well as government projects. In my opinion these would be a great use of resources from the AIA.

Posted by Judi Miller | November 12, 2007 1:41 PM

Posted on November 12, 2007 13:41

Milton Gregory Grew, AIA - Grew Design, Inc.:

It is frustrating to have the Fair Housing Act, ADAAG, ANSI and the scoping requirements of locally amended model codes and navigate through their overlapping and conflicting requirements. I agree with the comments of Casey Frazier and Dale Stephens. Architects are generally pretty ignorant of codes and regulations, let alone those having to do with accessibilty or adaptability. If an architect is going to practice in multi-family housing he is in absolute peril if he/she does not have a working knowledge of these requirements. My developer clients never know anything about them and would just as soon try to ignore them except for my insistence. My advice to other architects is do your homework, don't design to the absolute minimum requirements of these codes, and keep good records in your files about how you went about making decisions with respect to compliance. If you cannot take the time to do this then don't work on these building types.

Posted by Milton Gregory Grew, AIA - Grew Design, Inc. | November 12, 2007 5:20 PM

Posted on November 12, 2007 17:20

James Knight:

The lack of code curriculum in most if not all the schools of architecture establishes a basis for importance: accessibility is generally on the bottom of the list. The AIA, NCARB, and various state licensing agengies need to be more active in placing proper emphasis on all codes and especially ANSI and FHA

Posted by James Knight | November 13, 2007 1:17 PM

Posted on November 13, 2007 13:17

Diane Georgopulos :

The Boston Society of Architects polled its members this year to discern the source of difficulty in compliance with prevailing accessibility standards. Massachusetts has one of the oldest state accessibility codes in the country which was written and enforced by an advocacy driven board. There are a number of areas where the Mass code is significantly different that the federal codes/guidelines/standards. The clear preference of our members is to have one accessibility code that can be applied uniformly. If we haven't aleady done so, the AIA might consider a task force subcommitte to explore coordinating IBC with ANSI/ADADG/FFH as part of the public safety concern.

Posted by Diane Georgopulos | November 16, 2007 11:39 AM

Posted on November 16, 2007 11:39

Dan Meacham:

What can the AIA? Wake up to the Multi-family housing industry would be a great place to start. It has been a great source of frustration that the AIA is and has been noticeably missing from the current and historic deliberations and proposals put forward by HUD regarding FHA regulations. Not even a notice of proposed changes. Does anyone at AIA have any clue that key issues regarding FHA are scheduled to be heard in the Supreme Court? Why is it that only industry groups, NMHC, NAA, HBA,... are responding to HUD's proposed change in regulations and the AIA is silent? Any suggestions on where to start?

Posted by Dan Meacham | December 3, 2007 5:30 PM

Posted on December 3, 2007 17:30

Ralph Bennett:

At the University of Maryland, the comprehensive studio includes ADA in its required code studies and every graduate student is given a "disability experience" along with detailed explanation of the codes and a copy of the ADAAG Guidelines. This comes with the caution that the Guidelines are just that, that there is no "Code" and that compliance is a matter of very uneven judgement which can be followed by litigation. Our firm was notified two years ago by DOJ of an ADA violation at a project we designed - thousands were spent on attorneys, document production and proposed remedies - the complainant was never identified; the builder, who was willing to correct the few minor violations we made and found, was never contacted and nothing productive came of the action except employment for DOJ and many attorneys. Until this situation is changed, the results other correspondents decry are likely to continue. Considering the chief beneficiaries of the system, I am not sanguine about reform.

Posted by Ralph Bennett | January 4, 2008 1:13 PM

Posted on January 4, 2008 13:13

Sigmund Silver:

On a condominium parking lot, where a parking space is assigned to each unit, can the disabled parking spaces be for visitors only....every disabled resident has an assigned space that was assigned when he bought the unit.

Posted by Sigmund Silver | June 7, 2008 3:33 PM

Posted on June 7, 2008 15:33

The Angle

The blog for The Angle, a Government Advocacy publication.