Kat, 

I don't know if your explanation holds true in this case, the building was
used as the opera house, and the guy and his company decided to purchase and
make it into apartments.  They left the shell alone to the most part and
just turned it into apartments, would this still be grandfathered?  

Thanks, 
Anthony 
Visit my website at www.anthonyarnold.net
-----Original Message-----
From: Cerebral Palsy List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
Kathleen Salkin
Sent: Sunday, March 26, 2006 4:46 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Accessibility in apartments

Anthony, if a building was built before a certain date, they're  
grandfathered under the ADA and don't have to build such things a  
roll-in showers.  In fact, I think the minimum requirement is that  
the apartment is accessible, not that the kitchen or bathroom has to  
have handicapped-accessible equipment.  I have a bathtub and not a  
roll-in shower in my apartment and my kitchen counters and stove  
aren't lowered for wheelchair users, and the top cabinets wouldn't be  
accessible if I couldn't stand to put my dishes away.

Kat


On 26 Mar 2006, at 02:14, Anthony Arnold wrote:

> Friends,
>
>
>
> I definitely don't know all the details here, and I don't know what  
> the
> Americans with Disabilities Act reads, and I'm sure that most of  
> you have
> more knowledge behind the act.  However a local guy just purchased and
> turned a older building into apartments, and he has a few units  
> wheelchair
> accessible just like what he is required to do.  He had a open  
> house today,
> and my parents went to see it just for the fun of going, but  
> however they
> were surprised at his bathroom in the wheelchair accessible unit,  
> it has a
> bathtub instead of a roll-in shower.  My dad personally knows the  
> guy, so he
> questioned him on why he did a bathtub instead of a roll-in  
> shower.  He
> responded saying that's what the ADA requires, which seems weird to my
> parents, so I told them I would e-mail you guys to see what's up  
> with this.
> This isn't the first time we have wondered about the Americans with
> Disabilities Act.  Don't get me wrong, it's great but parts of it  
> are really
> questionable.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Anthony
>
>