Any pool changes since new DOJ rules?

[autumnblue]

Hi,

I am wondering if anyone has noticed the installation of pool lifts at any of the value resorts since the new rules for hotel pools being made accessible went into effect yesterday?

Thanks

Autumn

 

[chicagodisneyfan]

This is a horrible piece of legislation.

From CNN - In a press release Thursday, the Justice Department conceded there were "misunderstandings" about the pool law and extended the deadline 60 days. It also held open the possibility of even longer delays and said it will accept public comments on a possible six-month extension.

 

[TitanBrett]

That law is a mess

 

[bookwormde]

The pool lift issue is not new legislation, it is an extension of interpretation of the exisitng ADA laws.

The issue is that DOJ finally decided to enforce the law and did not fully think through the practical application and timelines. The lifts are a very small market, even smaller for commercial grade units that could never have met the demand for full compliance. Compound this with the fact that lifts are far from the "best solution" makes the issue all the more complex.

Zero entry is the long term solution, and I wish DOJ had allowed for that as a "medium term commitment" solution, as an alternative.

bookwormde

 

[SueM in MN]

The short answer is that WDW:

• has quite a few zero entry pools, either renovated or added in the last 10 years. There is a post on page 2 of the disABILITIES FAQs thread about zero entry pools, including locations and pictures.
• has been installing lifts in pools for quite some time - since about 2004. You won't be able to see anything at the pool because the lift is put out only when needed to avoid anyone playing with it. The only sign of the lift when it's not out is the attachment point, which is flush to the ground and pretty much blends in to be invisible when not in use.
• transfer tiers (a set of steps starting a seat height above the pool that a guest transfers to and then bumps up) are also allowed. Many of the pools at WDW do have those - I saw the first ones about 10 years ago.
• If you don't see a zero entry or a set of step of steps, ask. The lifeguard or someone in recreation will know. My guess is that you will find a lift is available since WDW has been installing access for quite a while. They may not have them at the quiet pools when a resort has one.

Pools were not included in the guidelines that were in effect previous to 2002, although some places had already put some accessibility features into their pools, knowing what those 2002 guidelines would say. The new rules had been out for a long time before becoming final and this guideline was actually published and in effect for NEW and Renovated pools in 2002. So a lot of places, including WDW, had already made changes to their pools.

This information is the basic information from the 2002 final recreation rule, with comments:
15.8.1 General

This section requires newly designed or newly constructed and altered swimming pools, wading pools, and spas to comply with 15.8. An exception has been added to the final rule that provides that an accessible route is not required to serve raised diving boards or diving platforms provided that an accessible route is provided to the base of the raised diving board or platform.

15.8.2 Swimming Pools

This section requires that at least two means of entry be provided for each public or common use swimming pool. A sloped entry or lift must be one of the primary means of access. The secondary means of access could include a pool lift, sloped entry, transfer wall, transfer system, or pool stairs.

Comment. The proposed rule permitted a moveable floor as a secondary means of entry. Commenters stated that even though moveable floors may have some practical applications they do not provide independent access and often place a person with a disability on display while the pool is evacuated and the floor raised to provide access. Additionally, commenters raised concerns regarding the removal of handrails and other means of egress prior to lifting the pool floor.

Response. The option of using a moveable floor as a secondary means of accessible entry in public or common use swimming pools has been deleted from the final rule.

The Board has also deleted the requirement that the second means of access not duplicate the first means of access in larger pools in the final rule. This should give designers additional flexibility in choosing between the various means of access. An appendix note recommends that where two means of access into the water are provided, different means are recommended.
Section 18 goes on in great detail to explain/define each point.


This is a link to a good article about the 60 day delay in the deadline for compliance.
The 2010 changes to the ADA extended the pool guidelines to existing pools, where it was readily achievable to do so. My guess is that many of the hotels complaining had not planned and thought either the guideline would not include any existing pools, would not include their facility because it was small or were waiting for guidance from someone higher up in their corporate structure. Here's a good fact sheet for businesses.

 

[SueM in MN]

The pool lift issue is not new legislation, it is an extension of interpretation of the exisitng ADA laws.

The issue is that DOJ finally decided to enforce the law and did not fully think through the practical application and timelines. The lifts are a very small market, even smaller for commercial grade units that could never have met the demand for full compliance. Compound this with the fact that lifts are far from the "best solution" makes the issue all the more complex.

Zero entry is the long term solution, and I wish DOJ had allowed for that as a "medium term commitment" solution, as an alternative.

bookwormde

I don't know what you mean by this.

Either a sloped entry (zero entry) or pool lift are required as one of the main ways of entry.

A second means of entry could be a sloped entry, lift, transfer wall, transfer system or pool stairs.

All of those have pluses and minuses.
Zero entry requires either new construction or major renovation. The ramped area needs to go to a depth of 24 to 30 inches. The allowable slope is, in most cases 12 inches of ramp for every 1 inch change is height - which means a ramp that goes to a depth of 24 to 30 inches needs to be 24 to 30 long.
So, renovating a pool to zero entry may take more space than is available. And, because renovating basically means tearing out the whole pool and rebuilding it, zero entry is very expensive.
A ramped entry may be appropriate for some people who can walk, but find steps difficult. Anyone who can't walk would need to use a water wheelchair, which some might find difficult to sit in for the trip into the water. And, when they get to the end of the ramp, some people may not have gotten far enough into the water to have buoyancy to get out easily.
Then, comes the issue with what to do with the water wheelchair; if it is left out all the time so someone who needs it has access without asking for it, it becomes an attractive 'plaything' for children who are not being adequately supervised.

Some people prefer lifts - they are actually what we have most experience with and prefer for our DD.

Transfer systems are the 'bump steps' I mentioned earlier. Many people with paraplegia, weak lower extremities or unsteady walking, but good upper body strength prefer them because it may be easier than transferring from their wheelchair to a lift or water wheelchair.
Although they may be the preferred transfer method for some people, they don't work well (or at all) for some people. For example, they not work for us because our DD has poor stability when sitting without support and she tends to extend (straighten out at the hips) when she is excited.

A transfer wall is kind of like a very small, steep ramp with gab bars at strategic places. That is what they have at the water park for the lazy rivers.

Steps that are the correct size and have good handrails may be the preferred method for some people who can walk. In fact, even though my DD doesn't walk, we did use the steps to get into the pools when she was a toddler up until she was about 6.

So, there is no one best way for pool access - what is best varies a lot from person to person.

 

[bookwormde]

Yes there is no single accommodation that is "best" for everyone.
Lifts have a number of drawback, especially the move in place type. They take knowledge or effort to know that they are even available, they do create a delay, and for some are seen as such a "production" as to not be an acceptable option for some. For others they are the best option. They also suffer from a level of the independent access issue, depending on the particular implementation and rules of use. They also are not, at the minimum regulatory requirement, usable for people of size beyond 300lbs.They do have the strong unique advantage of being capable of multi site usage, although there are still issues around that as far a multiple needs at the same time frame.
Bump in and out, work for some but not others, as do transfer wall and steps and are a low cost "second method", although as a primary only method I have concerns since they are presumptive a level of physical strength and agility.
Zero entry is certainly not the perfect solution for all either, since it requires either an aquatic capable mobility device, the strength and ability to self enter and egress on a slope or manual assistance. Where Zero entry really shines is with young children with disabilities who are not yet proficient swimmers, since none of the other methodologies provide the same benefit. Also it is one of those rare accommodations that provides major benefit the public at large, so in the cost analysis modeling should be only allocated as a percentage of total cost.

Of the 2 primary methodologies, zero entry has by far the lowest life cycle ADA attributable per annum cost.

Now that is is techically practical to refit pools to zero entry, having a stucture to allow for the Additional planning and implemetaion time though a "letter of commitment" with an extended but reasonable project timeframe would give the flexibility to use zero entry as a retrofit option, as it is now it is not in most cases.

It is notable that for wading pools, " The final rule limits the accessible means of entry into a wading pool to a sloped entry only. Examination of the different means of access into wading pools found zero grade entry to be the most appropriate and currently most provided means of entry"
Here is the original cost analysis form 2002 which calling it "incomplete" is being generous.
• Existing Facilities: 124,577 pools; no data on spas.
• New Construction: 1,245 new pools per year; 565 new spas per year. The assessment assumes 715 new pools per year have less than 300 linear feet of pool wall and will need at least one means of accessible entry into the pool.
• Small Entities: Ranges from 15 percent for private hospitals to 100 percent for camps and recreational vehicle parks.
• New Construction Impacts: For new pools with less than 300 linear feet of pool wall, the assessment assumes that a pool lift will be provided ($4,000 unit cost). For pools with 300 linear feet or more of pool wall, the assessment assumes 250 of these new pools per year will provide an accessible means of entry in the absence of the final rule and will add a pool lift ($4,000 unit cost). The assessment assumes the other new pools with 300 linear feet or more of pool wall will provide a pool lift ($4,000 unit cost) and pool stairs ($2,500 unit cost). The impacts on wading pools will be minimal. The assessment assumes new spas will provide a pool lift ($4,000 unit cost).
• Alterations Impacts: Minimal.
• Total Annual Compliance Costs: $8.0 million.




Bookwormde

 

[Nanajo1]

We returned home the day the new regulations were set to be implemented. Has anyone seen anything new? Any pool lifts?
Thanks for any info.

 

[SueM in MN]

There was a post asking the same thing while you were gone, so I'm going to add your post to that one.

The short answer is that you probably won't see the lifts that are installed. When not in use, they are pretty much invisible. To avoid people playing around with them, the 'business part' of the lifts have not been out unless they are in use.

The lift attaches to a small receptacle on the pool deck that is covered with a plate and is flush to the surface of the pool deck. So, the recepticle tends to blend in when not in use.

 

[BillSears]

Bookwormde,

I know you like the zero entry but to me zero entry just doesn't work at all. I prefer the bump steps since I can enter and exit the pool without any assistance. The lifts work a bit for me but require life guard help with installing the portable lift and turning the lift on and off. The zero entry just doesn't work unless a self propelled wheelchair is available and the wheelchair has to bring me into a depth of at least 3 maybe 3 1/2 feet so I can float out of the chair.

I've used the lift at POFQ while traveling solo, however even that needed a life guard on duty to get the lift set up and provide the key for use. Bump steps are at the pool 24/7 and require no assistance for me plus there are no moving parts to break. I can't see any way to use a zero entry pool solo. But like you said there is no entry system that is best for everyone.

 

[bookwormde]

There is no one size fits all that works or is preferable for everyone.
Part of why there is a requirement for 2 or more methods on larger pool
Having aquatic capable mobility devices (powered) is an area that have not been fully enforced or adjudicated. There are indication that they are a component of a zero angle compliance option in the wording, but it was not written clearly enough to make if "undeniable".
Yes zero entry does require, if a mobility device is needed, a person to do device retrieval and return, like many of the transfer attraction at WDW, although I have seen cases where they are "left in place" but that creates its own issues if others ore not respectful.
There are very few opportunities in implementation of ADA where the implementation of ADA provides significant perceived value to the broader population and zero entry is one of the best. Combine this with the cost analysis of life cycle cost multiplied by the percent of individual with disabilities that is can accommodate (with an aquatic chair) this combination is what makes me perceive it as "best". That certainly does not mean it a "best" for everyone or even a majority, with the diversity of disability needs, there is no majority "best"
bookwormde

 

[NotUrsula]

My local public pool has a lift and a retrofitted ramp on the original 1950's lap pool that was added about 5 years ago. The ramp is a switchback design, the deep end of which abuts the side of the regular entry steps; they were able to add it by running it parallel to the edge of the pool with a guard rail rising from the ledge.

The interesting thing about the design used at this pool is that the lift is UNDER one of the guard towers, so that there is never any issue with kids playing with it. It is set up with a large cage-type entry from the rear of the tower, and the guard on duty at the tower operates it for the guest. (This pool has no swim-at-your-own-risk hours, so this design works well for them.)

 

[WLodgeLizard]

I just read a story that the lifts must be bolted down. Just from a convenience sake, I would really appreciate it. On our last trip, we waited quite a while for a lift at Stormalong Bay. We finally decided just to lift our DS 12 and carry him into the pool. As luck would have it, 20 minutes later, it started raining.

We've been to another non-Disney (Cocoa Beach) hotel that had a portable lift. The crew there was very nice to bring it out for us each day, but we always felt a little bad that they had to drop everything and wheel it back and forth. (those things are not easy to maneuver) Also, there was the Florida summer rains that made it even trickier.

A few times, they would leave the lift out for us while we swam, which made it much easier for them.



Here's a quote from the AP story.

The Justice Department now says chair lifts must be bolted down. That declaration came as most hotels were buying portable lifts that don't require expensive installation and can be wheeled into storage until a guest needs them, said Kevin Maher of the American Hotels and Lodging Association.

The group argues that fixed chair lifts pose a risk to children who are tempted to play on them. Maher, the association's vice president for government relations, said hoteliers fear their insurance rates could increase.

The association is urging the Justice Department to reconsider portable lifts and extend the deadline. Without more time, Maher said, some hotels may close their pools this summer rather than risk lawsuits or fines.

"Whether they actually do it, I don't know," Maher said. "It's a notion pool owners and operators are contemplating."