Property owners around the city are likely familiar with the Accessible Business Entry (ABE) program. This mandated program was first introduced in 2015 by San Francisco supervisor Katy Tang. It was benevolently positioned as a way to ensure that small businesses would be protected from greedy attorneys, trying to extort them for thousands of dollars because their entrances were not accessible to people with disabilities. The attorneys’ scam was to send letters to business owners alleging that their client had been unable to gain access to their business due to an inaccessible entrance, then citing non-compliance with the federal Americans with Disabilities Act of1990 (ADA) and demanding $10K or more to avoid a lawsuit.
Unfortunately, the ABE legislation that was approved in 2016 was enacted without adequate research into ABE’s disruptive financial and logistical impact, and without adequate notice to businesses. As a result, many small business owners remain completely ignorant of their compliance requirements and deadlines, even 7 years later.
Complexities with leases between business owners and property owners have left each of them wondering which of them is required to shoulder ABE costs for ADA compliance.
Moreover, launching ABE legislation without adequate preparation also revealed the embarrassing fact that the San Francisco Building Department doesn’t even have an accurate list of commercial entry addresses, so violation notices have been routinely dispatched to innocent property owners demanding compliance for residential buildings that fall squarely outside of this program.
From ABE Door Entry to Ballooning Sidewalk Re-Grading
As a San Francisco architect, my team has processed hundreds of business entrance permits for this program, for property owners and managers dedicated to maintaining ABE compliance. Initially, most entrances could be made compliant by installing a power door operator – a fairly simple project. Unfortunately, over time, more bureaucratic red tape made its way into the program, making these projects more and more difficult to obtain approvals. Worse, these new requirements are now embedded in standard city reviews for all commercial renovations.
For example, within the past year, simple power door installations now suddenly require obtaining a separate permit from the Department of Public Works (DPW) for regrading the sidewalk to create a “level landing” at the exterior power door operator. In our city of hills, with sidewalks constructed long before ADA regulations, the requirement to provide a “level landing” has become practically impossible. Even worse, the requirement to regrade the sidewalks has completely undermined the original goal of the ABE legislation – to save small businesses from high costs. The sidewalk re-grading work alone will wring an additional $10K-$30K out of small businesses on top of the other required improvements. Suddenly, paying an attorney $10K to avoid a lawsuit looks like an appealing alternative to making the improvements required by the city.
As my firm continues to encounter difficulties with the ABE program, I’ve escalated our complaints to the Mayor’s office, the Office of Small Business, DPW’s Disability Access Coordinator, the Code Advisory Council, and the Building Standards Commission. My team and I have spoken with people at every level, but couldn’t find anyone with the authority to effect changes about how these projects are reviewed. Each department pointed the finger at the other department and we found ourselves stuck.
Who’s Helping Now?
In an ironic twist of fate, Katy Tang, the Supervisor who introduced the legislation for ABE compliance, is now the Executive Director of the SF Office of Small Business. In this role she is now responsible for helping these same small businesses try to comply with her ill-conceived program. On the plus side, Tang did help with implementation of a local grant program to help small businesses recoup $10K of the costs of design, engineering, permit fees, and construction. Unfortunately, getting reimbursed for the construction costs requires that these small businesses hire union labor to do the work, almost tripling the cost of the construction.
I’ve personally used this grant program for my own small business entry. My office manager had to spend hours on the phone trying to get our application processed and, ultimately, the only way to obtain the funds was to register as a vendor for the city. How will the hair salons, nail salons, and corner stores obtain the funds when they don’t qualify to be a city vendor?
A Glimmer of Hope: What You Can Do to Help
A glimmer of hope has arrived, though. Supervisor Rafael Mandelman is considering introducing legislation within the next month to eliminate this program altogether, but he is nervous about eliminating a program after so many business owners and property owners have already been compelled to shell out thousands of dollars toward accessibility improvements. Having said that, if you manage or own properties that have not yet complied with this program and are looking for a way out of this expensive upgrade, please contact his office to bolster support for elimination of this program. Please share case studies of real businesses who struggled to fund these improvements. Supervisor Mandelman - Contact Us
If you do reach out to Supervisor Mandelman, we also advocate that you request common-sense modifications to these ballooning ABE requirements. Keep in mind, the requirement for sidewalk regrading will not go away just because this legislation does. Entry upgrades will still be required for all other commercial tenant improvements, and requirements for level landings at the power door operators on the sidewalk will still remain. To protect future commercial renovations, please request that the DA-04 and DA-05 equivalencies for installation of power-door operators omit the requirement for level landings at the public right of way where existing sidewalk slopes exceed 2%.
Please join our efforts to protect small businesses so our city can thrive, while maintaining the sunny intention of the original ABE legislation goals.
Commentaires