4 ms·

So where should we draw the line? An 170 year old existing building should never be used for anything because it's not handicap accesible? I can't run an espres

by anm89 6y ago

So where should we draw the line? An 170 year old existing building should never be used for anything because it's not handicap accesible? I can't run an espresso machine that would be perfectly acceptable to use in the same structure for residential reasons but it is magically a fire risk once it is zoned commercial? Sorry but that does not hold up under scrutiny.

kube-system 6y ago
Your 170 year old building can still be used even though it is not handicap accessible. But construction or renovation of that building done in 2020 has to meet the laws of 2020.
- beamatronic 6y ago
  Which destroys the appeal of the building in the first place
  - Macha 6y ago
    If the plan was to build a new "traditional style" building, would the fact that a wheelchair ramp breaking the style/appeal of the building be a reason to bypass accessibility requirements?
    - beamatronic 6y ago
      The title of the article is "Why Every City Feels the Same Now". If someone is going to build a new traditional style building, they can't complain about why every city feels the same.
- anm89 6y ago
  The building is ready to use as is. Nothing needs to be constructed.
  - kube-system 6y ago
    You’re not modifying the property or the way it is being used at all? This “building in a residential neighborhood” is already configured for use in commercial foodservice? Or is it a residence now?
    - anm89 6y ago
      I literally want to install a single espresso machines and have some pour overs and french presses and set up tables and chairs. There is already a commercial grade dishwasher and fridge that the current tenant installed. I would have to install a grease trap to meet regulation which also is nonsensical given that I'm not cooking here but at least that is reasonably priced. As far as I'm concerned none of this is "build out" more like furnishing.
    - R0b0t1 6y ago
      The problem is preventative maintenance seems to fall under the ADA, or at least no one has challenged it. I can see both sides. On one hand if no one was forced to do anything many people may never be able to leave their house. On the other, Hardvard was sued and took down a bunch of freely provided lectures because they had no tractable way to caption them.

by anm89 6y ago

kube-system 6y ago

Your 170 year old building can still be used even though it is not handicap accessible. But construction or renovation of that building done in 2020 has to meet the laws of 2020.

beamatronic 6y ago
Which destroys the appeal of the building in the first place
- Macha 6y ago
  If the plan was to build a new "traditional style" building, would the fact that a wheelchair ramp breaking the style/appeal of the building be a reason to bypass accessibility requirements?
  - beamatronic 6y ago
    The title of the article is "Why Every City Feels the Same Now". If someone is going to build a new traditional style building, they can't complain about why every city feels the same.
anm89 6y ago
The building is ready to use as is. Nothing needs to be constructed.
- kube-system 6y ago
  You’re not modifying the property or the way it is being used at all? This “building in a residential neighborhood” is already configured for use in commercial foodservice? Or is it a residence now?
  - anm89 6y ago
    I literally want to install a single espresso machines and have some pour overs and french presses and set up tables and chairs. There is already a commercial grade dishwasher and fridge that the current tenant installed. I would have to install a grease trap to meet regulation which also is nonsensical given that I'm not cooking here but at least that is reasonably priced. As far as I'm concerned none of this is "build out" more like furnishing.
  - R0b0t1 6y ago
    The problem is preventative maintenance seems to fall under the ADA, or at least no one has challenged it. I can see both sides. On one hand if no one was forced to do anything many people may never be able to leave their house. On the other, Hardvard was sued and took down a bunch of freely provided lectures because they had no tractable way to caption them.