Recreation Facilities Compliance Responsibilities

Recreation facilities, services, programs, and activities offered by both public entities (state and local government) and private businesses are required to be accessible to people with disabilities. Compliance responsibilities are outlined below.  

Facility and Built Environment Accessibility

Recreation facilities are required to follow the 2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design.  These standards went into effect on March 12, 2012, and apply to new construction, alterations, and renovations. 

Three young men, two on bikes and one wheelchair user, on a paved trail together.

Along with general features such as parking lots, entrances, accessible routes, and bathrooms; standards for specific recreational features are included in the 2010 ADA Standards.

These are:

Recreation Program Access and Public Entities

For more information about program access obligations, expand the Great Plains ADA Center’s article recreation and program access section below.

Recreation, by its varied nature of services, poses unique challenges in achieving program access. On any given Saturday, a city’s residents may be taking water aerobics classes at the local recreation center, walking on a hiking trail, participating in youth soccer leagues, fishing, enjoying a picnic, or just hanging out with the kids at a neighborhood park. This myriad of activities must all be accessible to people with disabilities as part of the “program access” obligation of public entities under Title II of the ADA.

How does a public entity meet this obligation? The best way is to have all facilities, equipment, and outdoor areas fully compliant with accessibility standards. In the real world, however, this isn’t always the case. Limited budgets, lack of resources, and technical infeasibility can make bringing existing facilities and equipment into compliance difficult, if not impossible.

The ADA regulations provide flexibility for this reality by providing exceptions for actions that cause “undue hardship.” Public entities are also not required to take actions that change the “fundamental nature” of an activity or service. There is no exemption, however, for the obligation to provide program access to individuals with disabilities. This obligation is more than just “getting people in the door.” Program Access requires that use of facilities and services be equal to what other individuals receive, and it must be provided in an integrated setting with other members of the community.


The following scenarios illustrate “fundamental nature of the program,” “integrated setting,” and “undue hardship” along with different solutions to providing program access.

Scenario One: Integrated Setting

Ben, a pre-teen with Down’s Syndrome, has signed up to take swimming lessons with other children his age at the city’s swimming pool. He already knows how to swim and wants to advance his skills. The recreation department tells his family that an adaptive program is available at a different time for children with disabilities.

Response:  Ben’s ability to participate should be based on his ability to swim and participate in the group, not his disability. Ben should be allowed to participate in the class with other children his age as program access requires providing services in an integrated setting to the fullest extent possible. 

Scenario Two: Integrated Setting

A community has decided to start a wheelchair basketball team. Some members of the recreation department have expressed concern that providing a separate basketball program limited to wheelchair users would be discriminatory, are they right?

Response: No. Public entities may offer separate programs when separate measures are necessary to provide equal access to an activity. For instance, in order for individuals with disabilities to have the opportunity to play team sports, the best way to provide equal access to that type of opportunity may be a separate league for wheelchair basketball.

Scenario Three: Fundamental Nature of the Program

College XYZ has developed a mountain bike trail that is very popular. The college has received a complaint that the trail is not accessible to students with disabilities as the terrain is very rugged and hilly.

Response: In this case, changing the terrain of the trail would change the fundamental nature of the program, which is to provide a mountain bike experience to the user. However, if a student with a disability had a mountain bike with adapted features, the student should be permitted to use the trail just like any other student.

Scenario Four: Changing Locations to Provide Program Access

Anytown has four parks with large grassy areas and playground equipment. Each summer, the city offers a two week day camp with structured outdoor activities at the largest and oldest park. The park has a somewhat steep incline from the parking lot and the restrooms are not accessible. They have budgeted a complete renovation of the park, but this will not occur until the next year.

Response: Anytown does not wait to find out if any children or family members will need access to the day camp program. Instead, it makes the decision to temporarily move the day camp program to a smaller, accessible park as the reduced size will not affect the program.

Scenario Five: Planning to Meet a Variety of Needs

Littleton only has one pool and it is always filled to capacity. Littleton would like to open another pool but financial constraints make this impossible. The pool is required to have two means of accessible entry, one being a pool lift. The pool presently has a sloped entry. Little is hesitant to install a permanent fixed pool lift because the space is needed during swim meets and other functions.

Response: Littleton decides to buy a portable pool lift that can be securely fastened in place during pool hours but which can also be moved to make more space during swim meets. (Note: if an individual needed a pool lift during a swim meet, the lift would still be provided).

Scenario Six: Undue Hardship

Apple City’s recreation center is located in an older two-story building. The first floor has a basketball court and some side rooms. The second floor houses exercise equipment. They have received numerous complaints that there is no way for someone with a mobility impairment to use the exercise equipment without an elevator. Apple City’s budget is limited and the elevator expense is viewed as prohibitive. There are also structural difficulties in installing an elevator.

Response: Installing an elevator is legitimately an undue burden at this time. The city decides to put some standard and adapted exercise equipment in the side rooms on the first floor. Although not a permanent or optimal solution, this allows individuals with disabilities to exercise with family and friends. The city also begins a long-range plan to move recreation facilities to another location.

Recreation Business and Readily Achievable Barrier Removal

Private businesses with recreational facilities such as hotels and gyms are required to follow the  2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design. Existing facilities, however, (those built before the passage of the ADA in 1990) are only required to make the changes needed to meet the 2010 ADA Standards that are “readily achievable”. That means changes that are relatively inexpensive and easy to do based on the business’s resources.   Obviously, a large chain of fitness centers will have more money to update their facilities than a small business.  Learn more about readily achievable and small businesses below.

All businesses are required to remove architectural barriers even if their buildings were constructed prior the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act in 1990. This can be difficult for small businesses with limited budgets. However, existing buildings are not held to the same standard as buildings being constructed or renovated. Business owners in existing facilities that are not being renovated are only required to make changes that are “easily accomplishable without much difficulty or expense,” otherwise known as what is “readily achievable.”

Determining what is “readily achievable” is the responsibility of each business and varies from business to business. Obviously, what would be considered “much expense” is very different for a large chain of retail stores than for a small business. The phrase “without much difficulty or expense” is a broad statement and can be open to a lot of interpretation. How, then, should a business, especially a small business, determine what is considered “readily achievable” based upon their overall resources?

Factors to consider when making decisions about what is readily achievable (and not readily achievable)

Making decisions about barrier removal and whether it is readily achievable is done on a case-by-case basis. Factors to consider include:

  1. The nature and cost of the barrier removal 
  2. The overall financial resources of the site or sites involved, including:
    • The number of persons employed at the site;
    • The effect on expenses and resources;
    • Legitimate safety requirements necessary for safe operation, including crime prevention measures; and
    • Any other impact of the action on the operation of the site.
       
  3. The geographic separateness and the administrative or fiscal relationship of the site or sites to any parent corporation or entity

Based upon these criteria, a business may decide a change would have a negative impact on operations and profits, and therefore, not be “readily achievable.”

Example:

A convenience store determines that it would be inexpensive to remove shelves to provide access to wheelchair users throughout the store. However, this change would result in a significant loss of selling space that would have an adverse effect on its business. In this case, the removal of the shelves is not readily achievable and, thus, is not required by the ADA.

Technical difficulty and readily achievable

Along with cost and business operation, the technical feasibility of barrier removal must be taken into consideration.  It may be impossible to alter or expand a bathroom due to load bearing walls. A business with several front entrance steps that is close to a city street may not be able to provide an exterior ramp. When barrier removal is limited due to technical feasibility, the business should still consider if it is possible to make some type of change that will improve access, even if it falls short of meeting the 2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design.

Example:

The 2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design require accessible doorways to be at least 32 inches wide. A small business has an exterior door opening that is only 26 inches wide. They can widen the doorway to 30 inches, but widening the doorway to 32 inches will require extensive alteration of the building. In this case, widening the doorway to at least 30 inches will be viewed as working to meet their readily achievable obligations.

ADA Checklist for Existing Facilities: Identify barriers and develop a plan

Common sense dictates that before a business can determine its barrier removal responsibilities, it has to identify what is out of compliance. A good resource for this task is the ADA Checklist for Existing Facilities produced by the New England ADA Center (http://www.adachecklist.org(link is external)). This document provides background information and several checklists that address different priorities, possible barriers, technical specifications, and possible solutions.

Once barriers have been identified using these checklists, a business should develop a plan to remove readily achievable barriers. Reaching full compliance for many businesses is ongoing and takes several years. The ADA recognizes that a number of small businesses will never have the resources to bring their building(s) into full compliance. However, these businesses should continue to do as much as they can to become more accessible, based upon changes in resources over time.

Developing a plan based on priorities

ADA guidance recommends businesses develop a long-term plan for bringing their facilities into compliance. Where should a business start when there are numerous changes that need to be made? Should the most expensive changes they can afford be made first? The easiest? The cheapest?

To help businesses develop a long-range plan maximizing the access they can provide for the amount they can pay, the ADA regulations list four priority areas for readily achievable barrier removal.

Priority 1: Getting through the Door

The first priority is to make sure individuals with disabilities can physically enter the facility as independently as possible. “Getting through the door” also means providing physical access to a facility from public sidewalks and/or public transportation. If the business offers parking to its customers, providing accessible parking is also part of “getting through the door.”

Note: Portable ramps are permitted when the installation of a permanent ramp is not readily achievable. In order to promote safety, a portable ramp should be properly secured; have railings; and a firm, stable, nonslip surface.

Priority 2: Access to the Goods and Services

Once inside, people with disabilities need access to the business’s services including access to the front desk or checkout, access through the aisles, and any retail displays.

Priority 3: Restrooms

The third priority is to provide accessible restrooms, if restrooms are provided to other customers and clients.

Priority 4: Remaining Barriers

Features such as drinking fountains and telephones available to the public should be made accessible.

Customizing the readily achievable plan

ADA regulations do not mandate following these priorities. In fact, the regulations acknowledge that business may “mix and match” to best meet their customers’ needs. For example, Business A may have very limited resources and can only create an accessible route inside the store and lower a counter that contains product samples. Although these changes fall into priority two and four, they are what is currently readily achievable and so should be the first actions taken. Businesses should not avoid putting off making any accessibility changes because they are unable to meet all of priority one, etc.

Common sense goes a long way in developing a business compliance plan. It does not make sense to spend all of your available barrier removal dollars on creating an accessible bathroom, when there is no accessible parking and customers cannot enter through the front door.

Examples of meeting your “access to goods and services” obligation when physical barrier removal is not readily achievable

A restaurant has several steps at the entrance and no accessible entry is possible.  Providing home delivery or some alternative service may be required. In other cases, it may be possible to place an order by telephone or online and have a clerk bring the order to the customer outside the restaurant. If an alternative service is provided, it is important to publicize this so that customers know how goods and services are offered.

In a different restaurant, it is not readily achievable to make counters accessible by lowering heights or providing an accessible counter or bar area.  If possible, the restaurant should provide service in another way. This may include assisting customers by moving items to an accessible counter or to their table in another area.

A local grocery store is unable to make a sales/service counter accessible by lowering it. An alternative is installing a folding shelf or serving customers at a nearby accessible counter or table. If these steps are not readily achievable, the store should provide a clipboard or lap desk for customers as an alternative.

In a different grocery store, moving merchandise to create accessible aisles and lowered shelves would result in significant loss of selling space. In this case, staff should be available for customers who need help reaching merchandise. For example, staff can bring merchandise to a wheelchair user.

Recreation Videos


Great Plains ADA Center Recreation Videos