december 2002 - january2003 national fair housing advocate disability_issue

8/8/2019 December 2002 - January2003 National Fair Housing Advocate Disability_Issue

1/8

The condominium association re-fused to make reasonable accommoda-tions for Michaels disabilities and placedliens on his parents home for legalexpenses the Association might incur asa result of Michaels violations of association rules. According to docu-ments, others violated rules but had neverhad liens placed on their homes.

In June and July 1996, the Scialabbasand HOPE met with the Association in anattempt to get reasonable accommoda-tions for Michaels disabilities. TheAssociation refused and told theScialabbas that they could stay in theirhome only if Michael was committed toan institution. The Scialabbas refused,and the Association filed a lawsuit in anattempt to force the Scialabbas from theirhome. That suit was later dismissed.

On September 4, 1996, the Scialabbasfiled a complaint with the U.S.Department of Housing and UrbanDevelopment (HUD). After nearlythree years, HUD failed to issue adetermination in the complaint. TheScialabbas later filed a federal lawsuitwith the help of HOPE and the Chicago

Lawyers Committee for Civil RightsUnder Law.

The federal court made twoimportant rulings prior to the casesettling. First, the court determined thathousing providers have a duty to makegood faith efforts to accommodatedisabled residents before they attempt toremove them from units. This is true evenif a landlord or association contends thata disabled resident may pose a directthreat to the property, health or safety of

others. Second, the court determinedthat the Illinois Condominium Propertyallows a cause of action based onnegligence, meaning that an associationmay be held liable for failing to follow itsby-laws, rules and regulations.

Sharon K. Legenza represented theplaintiffs in this case along with John Z.Lee, a partner in Freeborn & Peters.

Advocate

N A TI O N A LFA IR HO USIN G

Volume XI, Number 1436 S. 7th Street., Suite 201

Louisville, KY 40203December 2002 - January2003

INSIDE

88

Disability &Accessibility

ReportThe National Fair Housing Advocate has compiled this fourth report tohighlight fair housing cases involvingaccessible design and constructionand persons with disabilities. All ofthe articles featured in this reporthave appeared in prior issues of theNational Fair Housing Advocate .Some have been edited for space.

Florida fair housing agency wins retro-fits in $1.5 million settlement againstcondo developer. See page 2

Las Vegas condo developers pay $350,000to settle Justice Dept. accessibility law-suit . See page 3

Chicago area real estate developer willpay $423,000 to retrofit units and removebarriers to access . See page 4

Oxford House wins $271,000 in judg-ments and fees against CT town in dis-ability case . See page 5

Disabled CT man wins $22,200 in rea-sonable accommodation case . See page 6

Access Living Chicago and Justice De-partment win $1 million settlementagainst IL developer. See page 7

Mobile home park in WA State orderedto pay $13,044 in service animal case .See page 8 from the July 2002 Advocate

Disabled IL man wins $160,000settlement from condo associationEarlier this year, Michael Scialabba, adisabled young man; his parents,James and Barbara Scialabba; andHOPE Fair Housing Center in Wheaton,Illinois settled a federal lawsuit againstthe Sierra Blanca Condominium NumberOne Association in Hanover Park,Illinois, and ABC Property Managers,Inc. The $160,000 settlement in January2002 resolves complaints resulting fromcontinual harassment by neighbors andthe condo associations members basedon Michaels disability.

Under the general terms of thesettlement, the condominium associationand property managers agreed to pay$160,000 and to take measures to preventand eradicate discrimination against anycurrent or future resident at SierraBlanca on the basis of the individualsactual or perceived disability. Thedefendants agreed to purchase a $50,000annuity for Michael Scialabbas benefitas part of the settlement.

In 1984, Michael suffered atraumatic brain injury in an automobileaccident. As a result of the injury,Michaels speech and movements are

impaired, causing him to have difficultyspeaking and walking.

Neighbor called disabled manretard face and pervert

After the accident, Michael washarassed and intimidated by neighborsand the condominium owners associa-tion. One particular resident calledMichael retard face, screamed duhat him when she saw him, and accused

him of being a stalker and a pervert.This neighbor filed several police actionsagainst Michael but failed to appear incourt each time charges were heard.

Children at the complex repeatedlyharassed and taunted Michael and stolehis wallet and shoes from the swimmingpool. The Scialabbas made repeatedcomplaints to the Association, but it took no action to stop the harassment.


2/8

Dec. 02 - Jan. 03 DISABILITY AND ACCESSIBILITY REPORT 2 f r o m

t h e S e p

t e m

b e r

1 9 9 9

A d v o c a t e

Florida accessibility settlement may costcondominium developers as much as $1.5 million

Cocoa, Floridas Fair Housing Continuum (FHC)negotiated a settlement worth $1.5 million with thedesigners, builders, and developers of three condominiumcomplexes on Floridas east coast. The April settlement

includes the cost of retrofitting unit features at eachcomplex and a $67,500 initial payment to the Fair HousingContinuum.

FHC found multiple design violations in the unitsand common areas at Shorewood Condominiums in CapeCanaveral, Ocean Oaks Condominiums in Brevard County,and Oleander Pointe Condominiums in Cocoa. Theseviolations would have made it difficult or impossible forpersons with mobility impairments to live at the complexes.

FHC Executive Director David Baade toldFlorida Today that his organization discovered doors thatwere too narrow, outlets and thermostats that would be out

of reach, and thresholds that were too high for wheelchairusers. Baade described these violations as the main types

of problems FHC found at the complexes.Towne Realty, Inc., a Milwaukee-based real estate

firm, developed all three of the complexes in this case. TheFair Housing Continuum filed its complaint based on

violations at Shorewood and Oleander Pointe. Townedisclosed that it had also developed Ocean Oaks duringlitigation. FHC named MRI Architectural Group and BenkoConstruction as defendants in the Shorewood and OleanderPointe complaints. FHC named ZRW Corporation adefendant in the Ocean Oaks complaint.

Under the settlement agreements for eachproperty, the defendants agreed to retrofit any unit at any of the complexes upon the request of the unit owner. Thesettlement also called for a $500 payment to any unit ownerswhom developers would displace while retrofitting wastaking place. After two years, the defendants agreed to pay

FHC $100 for each unit that they did not retrofit at ownersrequests.

Firm will notify all Florida architects of FairHousing Act requirement as part of settlement

MRI, the architectural firm for two of theproperties, agreed to send notification of the Fair HousingActs design and construction requirements to everylicensed architect in Florida. According to C.J. Miles,FHCs deputy director, HUD has reported a significantincrease in the number of requests from Florida architectsfor its Fair Housing Act Design Manual.

Mike Mervis, a spokesperson for Towne Realty,told Florida Today that he blamed ignorance andconfusing federal regulations for the violations at thethree Florida complexes. Mervis also blamed local codeenforcement officials for allowing the projects to moveahead.

Miles agreed that local building officials were notdoing enough to enforce state and federal design laws. OneFlorida building official told Miles that the Fair Housing Actdid not apply to his office. Miles does not think that housingadvocates should let developers off the hook for violatingthe Fair Housing Act and pointed to an early 1990s HUDproject designed to educate real estate professionals aboutthe design and construction requirements of the 1988amendments to the Fair Housing Act.

Baade also blames part of the problem on a lack of enforcement by government officials. He compared it tothe civil rights laws passed in the 1960s. The [laws] werepassed, but they werent enforced, Baade said in hisFlorida Today interview.


3/8

Share this report with othersOnce again, the Nati onal Fair Housing Adv ocate is making additional copies of its Disabilityand Accessibility report available in bulk quantities for disability rights advocates, civilrights groups, and real estate associations. If you would like to request additional copies ofthis report, please call the Fair Housing Council at 800-558-3247, send a fax to 502-583-3180,or send an e-mail to [email protected]. Please include your name, phonenumber, and mailing address in your request.

The Defendants in the case included RaintreeAssociates Ltd. Partnership, Falcon Construction Services,J. Lamont Langworthy, and Falcon Engineering Services.Each party agreed to resolve allegations that they had

violated the federal Fair Housing Act by signing the consentdecree. The decree does not spell out how much of thefinancial burden each party will bear.

The case against Raintree originally began as a complaintto the U.S. Department of Housing and UrbanDevelopment (HUD) from the Disability Rights ActionCenter, a Utah-based civil rights group that works in Utahand Nevada. HUD referred the complaint to theDepartment of Justice, which conducted its owninvestigation prior to filing the lawsuit.

The failure to make housing accessible when built has adevastating impact on people who need accessible housing,

and the need for accessible housing will become even morepronounced as the number of elderly persons in this countryincreases said Ralph F. Boyd, Jr., Assistant AttorneyGeneral for Civil Rights. This agreement will help ensurethat residents at Raintree Village will not be forced torelocate should they develop a disability.

Ensuring greater access for people with disabilities is apriority with this Administration, said Kenneth Marcus,General Deputy Assistant Secretary for HUDs Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity. This settlement sendsa clear message that we will vigorously enforce the law toensure fair housing for people with disabilities.

Under the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988,apartment complexes and condominiums with four or moreunits built for first occupancy after April 1991 must includeaccessible common amenities such as parking, walkways,pools, and clubhouses. Ground-floor units in suchmultifamily housing must also include doors wide enough toaccommodate persons who use wheelchairs, bathroomwalls that have reinforcements for the installation of grabbars, and bathrooms and kitchens that are large enough forpeople who use wheelchairs to maneuver within them.

Dec. 02 - Jan. 03 NATIONAL FAIR HOUSING ADVOCATE 3

A d v o c a t e

Justice Department gets $350,000 settlement inaccessibility case against Las Vegas condo developersIn February, the U.S. Department of Justice received a$350,000 settlement in a federal lawsuit against thedeveloper, builder, engineer, and architect responsible forthe design and construction of the Raintree Village

Condominiums in Las Vegas, Nevada. The settlement callsfor the developer to pay to retrofit the condominiumcomplex to bring it into compliance with the federal FairHousing Act and to compensate persons who have beenharmed by the lack of accessible features at the complex.

Owners displaced by modificationswill be paid $1,000 for inconvenience

The Consent Decree requires the Defendants to pay$280,000 into a fund that will be used to modify the commonareas and to modify the ground floor condominium units at

no expense to the owners. In all, 49 types of modificationswill be made to the common areas and ground floor units atRaintree Village. Current owners who elect to have theirunits made accessible will receive a $1,000 incentivepayment to compensate them for the inconvenience of having work done to their unit. The Decree also provides forthe payment of $70,000 to eight households for theindividuals who were harmed by the lack of accessiblefeatures at the complex.

In its complaint in the Federal District Court in LasVegas, the Justice Department alleged that the commonareas including the swimming pool at Raintree Village didnot comply with the accessibility requirements of the FairHousing Act. Many of the individual dwelling units on theground floor were inaccessible to persons usingwheelchairs, because the doors were too narrow to allowpersons with wheelchairs to pass through the unit.Additionally, many kitchens and bathrooms did not providethe required maneuvering space for persons who usewheelchairs. Finally, the Department alleged, environmen-tal controls were out of reach and bathroom walls were notreinforced for grab bars.


4/8

Dec. 02 - Jan. 03 DISABILITY AND ACCESSIBILITY REPORT 4

and through the dwelling, doors wide enough to accommo-date persons who use wheelchairs, bathroom walls thathave reinforcements for the installation of grab bars, bath-rooms and kitchens that are large enough for people who

use wheelchairs to maneuver within them, and environ-mental controls and electrical outlets at accessible heights.

In addition to making the complex accessible, the settle-ment agreement also requires the defendants to:

* Pay $40,000 in damages to persons who wereharmed by the lack of accessible features at thecomplex;

* Pay $3,000 as a civil penalty;* Obtain fair housing training for themselves and their

employees; and* Ensure that any future multifamily housing they

build is accessible to persons with disabilities.

Testers reported inaccessible features underlong-running DOJ fair housing testing program

The Department of Justice learned of the inaccessiblefeatures of the complex when testers sent to Foxcroft Apart-ments were told that at least half of the complex was notaccessible to persons using wheelchairs. Testers are per-sons who pose as prospective purchasers or renters in or-der to gain information about the practices of a housingprovider. Under a program established in 1991, the De-

partment of Justice frequently uses testers to uncover un-lawful housing discrimination.Congress intended new multifamily housing to be us-

able by people with disabilities, and we will continue tovigorously enforce this law, said Patrick J. Fitzgerald, U.S.Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois.

When builders fail to make apartments accessible, theyare denying housing to people with disabilities, said RalphF. Boyd, Jr., Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights.As this settlement demonstrates, it is far less expensive tomake housing accessible in the first place than to go back and fix it later.

Additional information about the accessibility require-ments of the Act is available on HUDs website atwww.hud.gov/fhe/fheacss.html.

The United States Department of Justice settled fairhousing claims against a Chicago area developer for$40,000 in damages, $3,000 in penalties, and an estimated$380,000 in retrofitting costs for a Naperville, Illinois apart-

ment complex to make it accessible to persons with dis-abilities. The May 2002 settlement is one of the latest in astring of Justice De-partment accessibilitysettlements in its ongo-ing fair housing testingprogram.

The lawsuit, filed infederal court in Chicagoin January 2001, allegedthat Foxcroft Partner-ship, Wilfred Barry,

DAbar Builders, andFoxcroft Management& Construction violatedthe Fair Housing Act byfailing to design andconstruct the FoxcroftApartments, a 118-unitapartment complex inNaperville, Illinois, to be accessible to persons with dis-abilities. At approximately half of the forty-four groundfloor units at the complex, there are steps into the units, thedoorways are too narrow for persons using wheelchairs to

get through them, the bathrooms and kitchens lack adequatemaneuvering space for persons using wheelchairs, thereare no reinforcements for grab bars in the bathroom, andthermostats and electrical outlets are placed at inacces-sible heights.

Many barriers will be removed immediately

Under the settlement agreement, Foxcroft Partnership,Wilfred Barry, and Foxcroft Management & Constructionwill correct accessibility barriers to make the complex ac-cessible to persons with disabilities. Some of the barrierswill be removed immediately, while changes to individualunits will be made at the request of current tenants or whenthe current tenants move out of the complex.

Under the Fair Housing Act, new apartment complexesand condominiums with four or more units must includeaccessible common amenities such as parking, walkways,pools, and clubhouses.

The Act also requires that the ground-floor units insuch new multifamily housing include accessible routes into

Chicago area developer to pay $423,000 to retrofitunits and settle disability discrimination claims

Ralph F. Boyd, Jr. is theAssistant Attorney General forCivil Rights at the U.S.Department of Justice.

U.S. v. Foxcroft PartnershipCase No. 01C-0365

U.S. District Court, Northern District of IllinoisWinifred Kao, U.S. Department of Justice, Housing and

Civil Enforcement Section; Attorney f r o m

t h e A u g u s

t 2 0 0 2

A d v o c a

t e


5/8


Oxford House, a group home for recovering addicts inNew Haven, Connecticut, received a $37,000 judgment and more than $234,000 in legal fees and costsfollowing an eight-day trial in

the United States DistrictCourt, District of Connecticut.According to a 70-page rulingby District Judge Gerard L.Goettel ,the City of WestHaven and the First FireDistrict of the City of WestHaven violated the Fair Hous-ing Amendments Act (FHAA)by enforcing its regulations and codes and not granting areasonable accommodation.

Beverly Tsombanidis, a homeowner using her home as

a group home for recovering alcohol and drug addicts,Oxford House, Inc., and a group of disabled residents allalleged that the city and fire district violated the FHAA andTitle II after the City and Fire District began finingTsombanidis and ordering her to reduce the number of residents at Oxford House. The plaintiffs filed disabilitydiscrimination claims alleging intentional discrimination,disparate impact, and failure to accommodate.

Neighbors complained of criminals and perverts

In 1997, neighbors of Oxford House complained to

West Haven officials that criminals and perverts hadbeen moved into their neighborhood without their consent.A West Haven building inspector visited Oxford House inthe weeks following the complaints. He orderedTsombanidis to make repairs and reduce the number of residents in the home and allegedly remarked that hewouldnt want addicts in his neighborhood, either. Then,the City began imposing fines of $99 a day, alleging thatTsombanidis was running an illegal boarding house.

Representatives of Oxford Houses national officewrote an extensive request for a reasonable accommoda-tion to allow the house in New Haven to remain open. Thatrequest and subsequent letters were ignored.

The city had argued that it was exempt from the FHAA,but the court found otherwise. Judge Goettel found that thecity intentionally discriminated against the plaintiffs byenforcing its regulations and codes and by ignoring theplaintiffs request for a reasonable accommodation.

The City had attempted to shut down Oxford House byclassifying it as a boarding house or rooming house ina neighborhood zoned for single-family homes. Judge

Goettel ruled that this disparately impacted the residents of Oxford House, who are protected by the FHAA. The Cityfailed to show that its actions furthered a legitimate

governmental interest and that no

alternative would have servedthat interest. The apparent bias of neighbors and public officials, the

judge found, also provided suffi-cient evidence to establish inten-tional discrimination in violation of the FHAA had taken place.

In his ruling Judge Goettleexplained, When the benefits of

allowing recovering alcoholics and drug abusers to live in asingle-family neighborhood are weighed against thefinancial and administrative burdens to the city, the benefits

to the plaintiffs far outweigh the burdens to the city.

Citys actions were motivated by discrimination

Steve Polin, general counsel for Oxford HouseInternational, was one of the attorneys that represented theWest Haven house in its federal lawsuit. These guys were

just looking for a place to put their lives back together, Polinsaid. The courts decision is important, he says, because itsays that the citys behavior was motivated bydiscrimination. If the city decides to unleash all of its policepowers on unpopular disabled residents, he said, the Fair

Housing Act and the ADA will be there to provide aremedy.Polin recommends that group homes facing the same

kind of opposition mobilize quickly, communicate with thelocal government that their rights are protected underfederal law, and put a detailed request for reasonableaccommodation in writing at the earliest opportunity. Thatletter should include a request that enforcement actions beheld in abeyance. Once that letter is sent, the ball is in thecitys court, he said. If it does nothing to respond, thatsa violation of the law.

Oxford House is a 25-year-old organization that hasstarted more than 900 self-help houses nationwide. Theresidents pay their own rent and live by democratic self-rule. Anyone who uses drugs or alcohol is expelled.

Connecticut city and fire department to pay$271,000 in judgments and fees in disability case

Tsombanidis v. City of West HavenCase No. NO. 3:98CV01316(GLG)180 F. Supp.2d 262 (D. Conn. 2001)

Steve Polin of Oxford House and members of the law firm of Zeldes, Needle & Cooper; Attorneys for Plaintiffs

If the city decides to unleash all of its police powers on unpopular disabled residents, the Fair Housing Act and the ADA will be there to provide a remedy.

-- Steve Polin Attorney for Oxford House

f r o m

t h e

A u g u s t

2 0 0 2

A d v o c a t e


6/8

Dec. 02 - Jan. 03 DISABILITY AND ACCESSIBILITY REPORT 6 f r o m

O c t o b e r

2 0 0 2

A d v o c a t e

In August, the Connecticut Commission on Human Rightsand Opportunities (CHRO) approved a $22,200settlement to resolve a complaint based on a landlordsfailure to reasonably accommodate a physically disabled

resident. The settlement includes $18,500 paid to thecomplainant and $3,700 for attorney fees. Additional relief includes a reserved parking space close to the building (andspaces for all other tenants with similar medical needs),automated doors in buildings, and the redesign of parkinglots to create accessible parking on an accessible route.

Accessible spaces used by guests and staff forceddisabled man to walk 200 feet to apartment

John J. McCarthy of Hamden, Connecticut assertedthat he was denied a parking space close to the 217-unit

senior living complex where he lived. McCarthy made areasonable accommodation request for an accessibleparking space due to his disabilities. Medical providersconfirmed his spinal and hip impairments and supported hisrequest. While there was ample tenant parking available atMcCarthys building, it was often used by staff and guests,making accessible parking unavailable. This forcedMcCarthy to walk more than 200 feet from the street to hishome. Building management even had McCarthys cartowed at one point, because he had parked in a time-limitedspace after hip replacement surgery.

CHRO Investigator Patricia Christie settled the casebetween the parties after extensive mediation. Thecomplaint was settled prior to a final determination beingentered by the CHRO. The respondents deniedwrongdoing in the case.

Davenport Residence, Inc., the complex owners, andElderly Housing Management, Inc., the managementcompany, agreed to have their Board members, agents andemployees participate in fair housing training as part of thesettlement. They will also receive special training regardingSection 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. Further, they agreedto rewrite their reasonable accommodation policy for theapproximately fifty elderly housing complexes they manageand to submit the rewritten policies to the CHRO for reviewprior to implementation.

Since the settlement, McCarthy has been harassed andintimidated. According to McCarthy, after the settlementwas reached, the management company held a tenantmeeting and informed the tenants of the changes that wouldbe made to the parking lot and the electronic doors thatwould be installed. At the meeting, the managementattempted to blame McCarthy for the problems and hinted

that rent amounts might rise,because of the changes. McCarthysaid that the management teamwas careful not to mention him

specifically by name in the meetingbut that several residents looked at

him and mentioned his name during the meeting. Since thatmeeting, asserts McCarthy, his car has been vandalized andhe has received threatening postcards. McCarthy said thathe has informed the police of the threats.

The CHRO has contacted the management andinformed them to take action to stop the harassment andintimidation McCarthy is facing. According to McCarthy,the management company made one weak attempt to stopthe harassment. They posted a sheet of stationary with notitle to an obscure bulletin board printed in small type, stating

that I had the right to file a discrimination complaint, hesaid. The emphasis was placed on me rather than theobligations of the owner and management of Davenport-Dunbar to follow the fair housing law. McCarthy informedthe CHRO of the notice and said that Christie has writtento the respondents attorney advising that the respondentscould face additional complaints if they do not take betteraction to stop the harassment. McCarthy said the obscurenotice was quickly removed.

For his part, McCarthy remains satisfied with thecases outcome. The action resulted in the freeing up of 20 or 21 parking spaces for residents with disabilities thathad been usurped by guests and employees.

Older buildings and those that receive federalassistance must comply with disability laws

Although Davenport-Dunbar Residence was built priorto the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the federal funding itpreviously received and the project-based Section 8 fundingit currently receives obligate the owner and managementcompany to use accessibility standards outlined in theRehabilitation Act and to pay for reasonable modificationsneeded by tenants. The accessibility requirements in thebuildings design are also covered under the ArchitecturalBarriers Act of 1968. Additionally, the owners andmanagement companies of all multifamily housing mustprovide reasonable accommodations and modificationsunder the disability provisions of the Fair HousingAmendments Act of 1988.

For more information about this settlement, contact theConnecticut Commission on Human Rights andOpportunities at (860) 541-3403.

Disabled Connecticut man wins $22,200 settlementin reasonable accommodation dispute with landlord


7/8

Buck Company partner, told the Chicago Tribune that his

firm hoped to complete the retrofits prior to the deadline.As this settlement demonstrates, it can be extremelyexpensive to go back and make housing accessible after abuilding is completed, U.S. Attorney for Northern IllinoisPatrick J. Fitzgerald said at a press conference to announcethe settlement.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Joan Laser added, The costis negligible if you design it right from the beginning, and nowtheyre having to spend more than $1 million.

Karen Tamley, a program director at Access Living,praised the settlement as one that will make developers takenotice of what will happen if they fail to design and build

accessible housing. She told the Chicago Sun Times that thesettlement definitely opens the market for the mobilityimpaired. She added, It sends the message to developersand designers that this is the law and you have to complywith it.

Marca Bristo, the president and CEO of Access Living,said that the lack of acceptable, affordable housing is oneof the largest obstacles disabled persons face. Fullindependence for our community will not be achieved untilwe have housing options on par with non-disabled citizens,she added.

Bristo is a wheelchair user herself. She suffered a neck injury nearly 25 years ago and was forced to spend an extramonth in the hospital, because she and her family could notfind accessible housing. We had to look at in excess of 100apartments before I could find one that would meet myneeds, she said.

For more information about this settlement, contact theU.S. Attorneys Office for Northern Illinois at 312-353-5300 or Access Living of Metropolitan Chicago at 312-253-7000.


Please add my name Please correct my address Please remove my namePlease send information for using the Advocate web page (http://www.fairhousing.com)

Name

Title

Organization

Address

City, State, ZIP

Phone ( ) Fax ( )

Please select one:Federal Government ArchitectCivil Rights Agency Builder/DeveloperFHAP Agency Real Estate AgentComm Development Mortgage BrokerState/Local Govt Bank/LenderFHIP Grantee Landlord/OwnerCHRB Mobile Home Park MgrOther Nonprofit/Adv Tenant/ResidentAttorney Academic/ResearcherPlanner Other

Please fax or mail to:Galen Martin, EditorTony Baize, Assistant EditorFax # 502/583-3180 Voice 502/583-3247

National Fair Housing Advocate436 S. 7th Street, Suite 201Louisville, KY 40203

Architects and builders to pay more than $1 millionto settle federal accessibility suit in Evanston, IL

The designers and developers of an Evanston, Illinois

apartment complex will pay at least $1 million tocorrect defects in the complexs construction and settle alawsuit charging them with discrimination against personswith physical disabilities. The September settlementresolves a December 2001 Justice Department lawsuitbased on the investigative work of Access Living of Metropolitan Chicago, a disability rights group. AccessLiving and the U.S. Attorneys Office for the NorthernDistrict of Illinois discovered numerous inaccessiblefeatures at Park Evanston, a 24-story luxury high-rise.

Harry Weese Associates, Park Evanstons architects,will pay $900,000 to retrofit apartments in the high-rise. The

John Buck Company, who developed the site, will pay forand perform the work for retrofitting inaccessible features.The total retrofitting costs are expected to exceed $1 millionand could take up to five years to complete. The defendantswill also pay into a $50,000 victims fund to identify disabledpersons who could not move into Park Evanston, $40,000for Access Livings attorneys fees and costs, and a $13,600civil penalty. According to the United States Department of Justice, this $1 million settlement was the largest fairhousing accessibility settlement involving a single building.

During its investigation into Park Evanston, which wasbuilt in 1997, Access Living found multiple violations of theFair Housing Acts accessibility provisions. Bathroom andbedroom doors were too narrow for wheelchair users,bathrooms and kitchens did not have maneuvering space forwheelchair users, and thermostats were placed too high forpersons with physical disabilities.

The John Buck Company attempted to place the blameon the architects. In court documents, the company claimedthat architects are responsible to design buildings incompliance with accessibility laws. Kent Swanson, a John f r o

m O

c t o b e r

2 0 0 2

A d v o c a t e


8/8

Notice: The work that provided the basis for this publication was supported by funding under a grant with the U.S. Department of Housing and UrbanDevelopment. The substance and findings of the work are dedicated to the public. The author and publisher are solely responsible for the accuracy of thestatements and interpretations contained in this publication. Such interpretations do not necessarily reflect the views of the Government.

f r o m

t h e N o v e m

b e r

2 0 0 2

A d v o c a t e

Candida Campbell, a disabled woman from Clark

County, Washington, was awarded $13,044 indamages as a result of a disability discrimination complaintfiled with the Washington State Human Rights Commission(WSHRC) against Timberlane Mobile Home Park locatedin Winlock, Washington. The park attempted to enforce ano-pets policy against Campbells service animal.

Campbell asserted that managers at Timberlane MobileHome Park denied her residence because of her use of aservice animal. Campbell suffers from severe migraineheadaches. They range in severity and may come on withadvance warning or very suddenly. Campbells dog,Spicey, is able to alert others to her need for assistance.

Spicey is a Pomeranian.Although Timberlane Mobile Home Park has a no-petspolicy, the Washington State Law Against Discriminationsays, It is an unfair practice for any person, whether actingfor himself, herself, or another, because of . . . any sensory,mental, or physical disability, or the use of a trained dogguide or service animal by a disabled person to refuse to

rent or sell housing to that person. The WSHRC

investigated Campbells complaint and concluded that themobile home park had acted illegally in denying housing toCampbell and Spicey.

In addition to the $13,044 awarded to CandidaCampbell, the administrative law judge who ruled in the caseawarded $2,000 to her brother, Scott Campbell foremotional distress and mental suffering. The judge alsoassessed a civil penalty of $2,000 to vindicate the publicinterest and prevent further discrimination. TimberlaneMobile Home Park has filed an appeal of the decision inClark County Superior Court.

According to Mary Clogston of the WSHRC, the

administrative law judge awarded the maximum amountsfor humiliation and mental suffering allowable underWashington law. She also noted that the initial awards hadbeen lower but that Campbell appealed.

Campbell originally filed her complaint in 1997 with theCommission. The first hearing in the matter occurred inFebruary 2002 with the final ruling in September 2002.

Clark County, Washington woman wins $13,044 inservice animal complaint against mobile home park

Fair Housing Council436 S. 7th Street, Suite 201Louisville, KY 40203

december 2002 - january2003 national fair housing advocate disability_issue

Documents