Mandatory Pool Lift Requirement Kicks In Tomorrow

One of the requirements of this mandate is to remove barriers that impede handicap access to the pools. The problem is, these barriers are also mandated by local code to prevent unaccompanied children from entering the pool area.

This mandate also requires that the lifts be operable by the handicapped person that wants to enter the pool.

Most of these pools are "swim at your own risk". If I was a hotel owner, I would not feel comfortable with a disabled person, alone in the pool. I don't imagine that the insurance underwriters are going to feel good about it either.

I'm certainly all for doing everything within reason to accommodate people with physical disabilities, but I wonder if this goes too far, and if it will entail unintentional consequences.

Can our public pools afford another hit?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/30/public-pools-closing-acro_n_868753.html

Another government agency run amok! Encouraging and helping to assist the disabled is one thing. A you-do-it-or-else stance smacks of socialist policy.

If it were my business I would be first in line to drain, shut down my pool, cancel my pool maintenance contract, and post a big sign explaining why.

Then call my insurance agency and have them remove my coverage so I can save even more money.

Well, yes and no. I could understand having public facilities being required to have one portable lift...................period.

These are relatively inexpensive and would do the trick. It would still be "do it or else", but not completely unreasonable.

Some things make sense, and some things don't. This is a bad one.

Once again, you appear to be making a lot of useless noise. This isn't about helping or not helping disabled people, besides, I believe the people in your pictures are quite capable of getting in and out of a pool without assistance.

Many facilities already have portable lifts. These will no longer be acceptable under the new mandate.

Community pools that are run by cities and towns, as my link shows, are already being closed due to budget shortfalls. In many cases, these are the only place for city kids to go swimming in the summer. This mandate will contribute to closing them.

Finally, if you think this thread is about picking on handicapped people, once again, you are completely confused. Please refrain from defending them, it's not what this thread is about.

Many facilities already have portable lifts. These will no longer be acceptable under the new mandate.

Well that stopped me in my tracks. You mean they created an industry and monopolize it at the same time? Maybe they are driven to the Bank in wheelchairs because they can't walk for laughing?

I am so out of here but will keep sketching, still.

I can see a lot of pools closing due to cost of operation.

I think this will be one of those ideas that come back to burn everyone.

As far as the idea this will create jobs... Initially it may create a few jobs, but it will probably eliminate a number of jobs if, as I suspect, many institutions simply close the pools to save money and avoid fines.

I would expect insurance to rise. By freely opening the pool to handicapped individuals you are increasing your liability. At least I think the insurance firms will see it that way.

Lastly, I am not against the handicapped, but I think it unreasonable to expect everyone to absorb 10s of thousands of dollars per installation, do so in a very short time frame, and be subjected to huge fines. This legislation seems to be the product of out of control law and policy makers.

I think a lot of them will close also.

Hotel and motel pools, in many places, rarely get used by anyone. Shutting them down makes sense. Either way it's going to cost them them. In many municipalities, simply draining a pool and letting it sit, is also illegal.

I was being sarcastic on the job creation. Sure, it'll help a few people for the short term, but it's going to hurt a lot more others.

So what about public access lakes, ponds, and river swimming areas?

"...lakes, ponds, and river swimming areas." are not facilities. There you go again, using some common sense.

Well according to the powers that be http://www.access-board.gov/recreation/status.htm Lakes, ponds, and rivers would be boating and fishing facilities which obviously give people access to open bodies of water that they can swim in that could very well be located in or on private/public/federal land maintained by the public and local governing boards and such and such with tax payers money.

I will try and tone down the common practical applied sense being I realize it does make me stand out in the public eye at times. A few blows to the head with my 2# hammer should drop me back a bit closer to more common levels don't you think?

Somewhere in my myriad ADA Title III stuff I have a determination (which has probably been superceded by something anyway) that discusses things like hiking trails, lakes and ponds... that determination is that these are not facilities but natural features, and are outside the scope of the ADA.

I agree, developed sites (like a boat ramp) will almost certainly be required to comply. In North Dakota, Wyoming, Montana, and Idaho there are a number of fishing access sites that are not much more that a wide spot in the road, often no outhouse just a trash can. I am was under the impression these types of "Recreation Areas" would not need to be made to comply, but now it looks like that may be incorrect.

Like the pools, if this is the case several of these casual use sites will most certainly be closed to the public.

Can you box up some of that common sense and send it to someone?

I think those are safe................for now.

The entities that have recently installed zero-entry pools had their poop in a group.

I thought it was a fad. It appears this legislation has been in the works for a while.

First of all, I'm pretty sure this is for new installation public access swimming pools and spa's and such...and, as always there are many exceptions, loopholes, and extenuating circumstances that apply...So before you go shopping for a lift for your kiddie pool, I would contact your local compliance officer...

http://www.ada.gov/regs2010/2010ADAStandards/Guidance2010ADAstandards.htm

Wrong. No pools or spas get grandfathered in. All must comply and do the necessary retrofitting or close.

"Wrong. No pools or spas get grandfathered in. All must comply and do the necessary retrofitting or close."

Correct. This is a link to a Hotel Industry newsletter discussing this very issue. Yes, existing pools must be refitted with compliant equipment or face the music (or close the pools, spa and hot tubs).

Why don't you want handicapped people to have access to public pools???

Why don't you bug off and go find a funny picture on the internet?

I'm interested in hearing about alternative design ideas and thoughts about this mandate.

You are contributing nothing.

Well then my thoughts are this is a good idea that should have been done long ago, and that you are just a hater....

You forgot bigot, homophobe.

Shove off lover. There's obviously no place in this conversation for you.

$4000 to $9000 for one of those?

I will, in my own time, build an attachment for any wheelchair and sell them for $2000. It would just become part of the wheelchair. Retrofit would be good. There must be a cheaper way to get the handicapped to swim.

Just while typing this I have come up with two feasible ways of doing this and way under 2 grand. This would be a great challenge for any engineer. I'll start with a few sketches.

The designers/manufacturers/inventors of these portable lifts must be laughing all the way to the bank. Government legislated sales and if 'they' _(us) don't buy and obey we are hit even harder. This is never going to become reality anyway. Who is going to enforce this craze?

On paper? Maybe.

"Who is going to enforce this craze?"

The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) is a civil rights law, not criminal. There will not be (should not be, anyway) patrols out looking for non-compliance.

When a citizen complains that they are being discriminated against, it MUST be investigated. If the complaint is valid, then things start to happen.

So, sell these for two thousand bucks? That won't leave much reserve for liabilty insurances. Will it really lift a 350 pound person? What if someone self uses, and your device does not stop them from placing their mother's electric chair in the pool? (Yes, I saw that once... I couldn't believe it either. They sued the hotel for negligence and won the case)

I'm more thinking of slipping and sliding and not lifting. You know, like those airplane evacuation slides. Like those whistles you blow in and that extend and are usually accompanied by a party hat. I little winch and Bob is part of the extended family.

Not sure about the accompanying sound, if any

Good thinking ky. I bet even us dummies on CR4 could come up with at least 20 ways to accomplish this.........................no electricity required.

One would need a small compressor to inflate but DC would suffice. It wouldn't have to be up and running in seconds.

I have a friend who relies on a wheelchair. I'll have a beer with him and hear it from the horses mouth how he enters a pool, if at all. We don't have these contraptions here and no legislation as far as I know. It would be good to be able help.

What do you call a wheelchair driver in the jungle?

What do you call a wheelchair driver in the jungle?

^{Meals on wheels.}

Anyway, I think I have a solution. Maybe $200 and not only for the disabled but for kids and half drunks.

A bit like this just inflated and nice and soft. Maybe less of a shoot too. My bad, I know.

Good one!!

Anybody that knows you, would know it's a joke..................and that you would help about anyone if you could.

solareagle probably hit the report button. He has no idea what this conversation is about.

He thinks it's hate speech. Dolt.

Just ignore him. He'll go away after a while. We're witnessing his new hobby.

The mandate says they have to be able to lift 300 lbs.

Well, now that obesity has been classified as a disease, my next question would be.................Isn't this discrimination against people that weigh more than 300lbs?

They may also be wheelchair bound, due to the fact that they can't support their own weight. It doesn't seem fair.

Enforcement will be performed by lawyers looking to suck money out of struggling hotels in the name of handicapped fairness.

The $4000 -$9000 is just for the lift. They still have to pay for installation, which is going to involve running electricity, (safely), out to to the edge of the pool. I'm sure there's another heap of regulations, just in that aspect of it.

Yes there are much cheaper ways. The portable units work just fine.

I thought I also read something about removing barriers that would prevent a handicapped person from entering the pool area.

What the idiots fail to mention....................is that the barriers were mandated to prevent little kids from getting in there and drowning.

So with the latest design challenge ky.............bear in mind that the system must enable the handicapped person to do it on their own. They must also be able to enter the pool area on their own, without comprimising the integrity of the mandated barrier to prevent little ones from getting in there.

bear in mind that the system must enable the handicapped person to do it on their own.

That would depend on the disability. It is impossible do operate the "crane" and be in the water at the same time. A disabled person will always need a helping hand. I would, in any case, be of assistance.

I'll keep sketching, Ky.

It appears as if they want this to be able to be carried out without assistance. I might be wrong.

I would be more than happy to be of assistance also.

By ADA standards the facility has have the ability for the handicapped person to be able to do whatever on their own. These types of regulations have actually been on the books since ADA legislation went into effect but were only enforced occasionally.

We are redoing many of our c-stores and gas stations in the area due to this type off regulation.

There have been buttons on the pumps for years that have the little ADA symbol for the person to call for assistance at the pump if they needed it. That is no longer considered good enough. To be ADA compliant there has to be a special pump station that meets all the ADA height and clearance requirements plus be a path from that pump to the entrance that meets all ADA requirements and marked in a matter that they can see exactly where the path is. Like a crosswalk. QT lost a lawsuit a about a year ago because they did not meet the regulations. Now all of our c-stores & gas station clients are rushing to meet these regulations.

And yes there are people that go around and check these things. And yes, that is all that they do. Our state hwy dept was sued because a sidewalk just barely did not meet ADA standards. You couldn't see the slight difference in the slope but our local compliance checker checked it with his trusty electronic level and it happened to have a 3% cross slope instead of 2%. So now the state & local governments have a dept that checks these things out on just about every project.

Some of the regulations are ridiculous though. Such as, we had a fast food restaurant that had to have an ADA compliant path to the trash dumpster. OK once they get there how do they get he trash in your typical dumpster. Most non-disabled adults have problems lifting a full trash can into your typical dumpster let alone a disabled person doing it. Do you now have to have a dumpster with and opening that is only 30 inches high? Guess all dumpsters need to be redesigned to have a door at that level.

Oh and the signs can NOT say HANDICAPPED they can say DISABLED!

So would this meet the requirements?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunking

I would support a resistance movement to this ADA nonsense. This equipment will pose extra risk and hazard to pool owners and users. Maintenance and inspection will run costs up even more. If the handicapped community want to swim, they can finance a facility.

Sorry to be hard, but it's human nature for healthy people to be uneasy around handicapped people. Encouraging this activity will hurt business, in my opinion.

Agreed! We've got this handicapped lawyer who goes around suing all the small businesses that don't meet the handicap ramp statute. He makes a bundle while forcing small businesses to spend (waste?) tens of thousands of dollars to meet spec, or go out of business...

Now he can start all over!

I think it's probably the fact that he's a scoundrel lawyer, that makes people uncomfortable, not that he's handicapped.

The one article says that the hotels that already have lifts, just keep them to have them available, because they never get used.

You guys sound like people talking about blacks back in the 60's ....They had all kinds of excuses...Why don't you go spend some time around handicapped people, so you won't feel so uneasy in their presence...You might as well get used to it, cuz these laws are here to stay...

This is not about handicapped people gaining access to the local pool. This is about giving torts attorneys access to a new gravy train. The overnight law with no grace period proves this point.

Entrance to the pool poses little problem, egress though is another matter. The article I read states, that many pools are swim at your own risk, with no attendant on duty.

The only viable recourse are to make the pools private (like some entertainment clubs) or close them entirely.

I The lift shall be capable of unassisted operation from both the deck and water levels. Controls and operating mechanisms shall be unobstructed when the lift is in use and shall comply with 309.4 Pool lifts must be capable of unassisted operation from both the deck and water levels. This will permit a person to call the pool lift when the pool lift is in the opposite position. It is extremely important for a person who is swimming alone to be able to call the pool lift when it is in the up position so he or she will not be stranded in the water for extended periods of time awaiting assistance. The requirement for a pool lift to be independently operable does not preclude assistance from being provided.

From here:

http://www.aquaticaccess.com/adaadvisor.htm

If there really 50 million "disabled" in the USA that need this, how many children are there and how many will be at risk by removing the barriers?

I have no idea how they are going to pull this off. I don't think the government specifies how to do it and keep children safe. Only that they will be fined out of existence if they don't do it. My guess is that many public pools will simply go away.

At least it will fit the new doctrine of fairness..........................nobody will be able to swim.

Enough said.

Just for the heck of it I looked into what kind of certification installers must have, if any.

Nothing. Zero, zip, nada......................anybody can be an installer.

I'm sure the lawyers are salivating.

I'm also sure there's no correlation.

http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/indus.php?cycle=2008&cid=N00009638

Yep. One more thing.........................has anyone bothered to ask the handicapped people??!!!

I spent 3 months in traction and 2 1/2 years on crutches when I was young. I always appreciated it if someone held a door open for me.

I WOULD NOT have been comfortable with having laws enacted to force everyone else to do something to accommodate me. It only would have made me much more self conscious.........................maybe even ashamed, because whether people showed it or not, I would have known that they blamed me for the forced changes.

The corners on the main streets in our town and many side street had to be torn up and redone with ramps 5 years ago. To this day, I have yet to see a single wheelchair on any of the sidewalks, oh wait, I did see one and it was a child being pushed by an adult who I'm sure could have managed to get over a 6" curb with a 60# child.

How much environmental damage was done and resources were wasted between the construction vehicle exhaust, the needless manufacture of cement-a high energy usage industry, the making of the concrete and its delivery, the dumping of the old concrete into a landfill and so on. Then Congress points it's dirty fingers at the "energy wasting taxpayers" and says "shame on you" as Gore builds another house to stay in for 3 weeks out of the year while heating and cooling it the other 49 weeks for the staff he maintains there.

Besides they think that all that work doesn't cost anything since it's an "unfunded mandate". If it came out of their salary and expense accounts they would consider it "real money".

It was a shovel ready job.

So is cleaning out horse stalls.

Is it me (being a bit paranoid?), or does most everyone else seem to think that regulations like this have more to do with cronyism in Washington and less to do with actually useful legislation?

New rules like this create a burden for small mom-and-pop companies (who operate at a narrow profit-and-loss margin) while large corporations (who dole out millions of dollars to the politicians and bureaucrats in DC) have the financial capital to absorb the cost of these mandates. For the large corporations, these mandates serve as a way to drive the small companies out of business. I wouldn't be surprised if it was discovered that the large corporations participated in drafting the legislation; often that's how the wheels turn in government.

It would sort-of makes sense to have this requirement for all publicly owned pools. After all, handicapped people pay taxes, too, and have a right to any publicly funded building, park, etc. It does not make sense, though, to require this for privately owned pools at hotels; this seems like a gray area to me. A hotel is not 'required' to give a room to anyone who walks or rolls up to their registration desk -- they are required not to discriminate. It seems to me that a 'use at your own risk' pool is just that, and that applies to able individuals as well as to the handicapped.

Side note: My wife was in a wheelchair for the last 3 years of her all-too-short life. My mother was handicapped (COPD) the last year of her life, and needed a wheelchair. A friend I've had for 20+ years suffers with juvenile arthritis, and needs a wheelchair. So, I think I am sympathetic to the needs of the handicapped. YOU try helping a handicapped person use a restroom 'handicapped' stall -- and you'll realize how useless these well-intentioned regulations often are.

You wrote, "Is it me (being a bit paranoid?)"

I think when you have legislation after legislation that is either significantly flawed or biased you reach a point of becoming cynical when the next new law hits the books.

At some point you begin to feel every new law that hits the paper is bad before even looking at it.

That may not be a good way to judge legislation, but if you were a gambler you would probably come out ahead.

I don't think you're being paranoid.

Look at it this way:

We've got people with all manner of disabilities in our society. With the wheelchair bound, we've got people with cerebral palsy, loss of legs, paralysis, etc. They may or may not have the upper body strength to get themselves out of trouble in a pool.

Now...............here we are. We've got the federal government mandating that every pool and spa be equipped in such a way that these people can enter on their own, with no assistance and nobody else around.

Does this make sense?

These people are labeled as handicapped or disabled for a reason. Life has dealt them a crappy hand, and they are physically not able to do things that the non-handicapped can. The first time one of these people drown trying to prove something to themselves, it's not going to be the government that pays.

I also find it ironic, that as the government forces mandates in the name of helping these people become independent, they simultaneously enact policies that stifle the economy, endless unemployment extensions, offering grants to find and get people on foodstamps......................pretty much anything to herd the non-handicapped into a role where they are completely dependent on government.

It makes no sense.

no more swimming at your own risk but skateboarding at your own risk?

Probably. I drove past an outdoor pool at a fairly small hotel the other day.

No lift, and solid green. They really get nasty when small animals start falling in and dying.

Public pools are a great place to pick up diseases. I don't go to them. Next they will want to install elevators for the diving boards.

Is it a good thing?

Yes; more disabled people can now swim.

No; more disabled people will swim, more people will drown.

This is what the hotel pool near me looks like. It's quite obvious that it won't be opened. Social justice has prevailed...........................no one will be swimming. I'll try to remember to bring my camera and snap a picture. It's depressing.

How far to the next beach? Maybe they want to get into the algae fuel business.

Over the last few days this thread popped up in my thoughts. Well, at least when I saw one the the wheel chair riders here. It's a small community here so it can not be generalized but these unfortunate humans would need not ask twice and most of us would go out of our way to be of assistance. We even have wheel chair buggies with huge tires.

To legislate, enforce humanity, as is suggested by this utterly ridiculous law, it looks more like a cancer than a band aide. In the end it is not a good sign for any culture to enforce caring and love and respect. If not obeyed the Lemmings are fined. To be very honest, I still think this is all a hoax.

The idea with my inflatable slide (Up and down) will not be realized because even if it would work as I think it will, I'd have to fight a paper war to get it to help the needy. I'd rather give a hand and learn how to communicate with a disabled person. BTW they can be very funny and laughing is the best known medicine anyway. Just try them!

Has any one of you been in touch with a wheel chair bound person since this thread started? Some one suggested in an earlier post to consult with 'them', I think that is imperative. The legal eagles have a lot to answer for but that shouldn't stop us from standing up for even an elderly person, as well as offering a seat.

It all starts at home, there were the heart still beats a common sense drum.

Weekend on the beach it is, Ky

No hoax.

I really don't need to try anything. I've been disabled, hung out with disabled people......................hell, everybody is disabled in some fashion. It never occurred to me to think of anyone as anything but a person. To me there are two groups. Cool people, and a**holes. I go out of my way to not be around the a**holes.

It's all pretty simple.

Attempting to mandate niceness or fairness is a fools errand.

Fortunately I know a lot of people that would be happy to help out a handicapped person or anybody else that needed it. Maybe I live in a cocoon. I haven't been paying much attention. It's possible that society has become so rotten to the core that government must force people to do the right thing. Whether they can afford it or not.