Summary
The United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas declined to modify its prior judgment requiring 5860 San Felipe Ltd. to make an ADA-compliant curb-ramp modification at a Houston strip mall. The court held that the defendant’s supplemental evidence did not show that the proposed dropdown-style or parallel-style curb ramp was infeasible, would violate ADA requirements, or imposed an undue financial hardship.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the proposed dropdown-style or parallel-style curb-ramp modifications would violate ADA accessibility requirements by reducing the accessible route below the minimum width or by intruding into required door maneuvering clearance.
- Whether the property carried its burden to show that constructing an ADA-compliant curb ramp was not readily achievable because of feasibility, permitting requirements, cost, or business disruption.
- Whether the supplemented evidence warranted a new trial or alteration or amendment of the final judgment under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 59(a) or 59(e).
Holdings
- A restaurant door that temporarily swings into an exterior sidewalk when patrons enter or leave does not, on this record, make the sidewalk inaccessible or require subtracting the door's full width from the accessible-route calculation. ADAAG § 603.2.3 governs toilet and bathing rooms and does not apply to the exterior sidewalk.
- The proposed curb ramp would not violate ADAAG § 404.2.4 because at least 60 inches of space would remain between Fu's Garden's entrance door and the ramp, satisfying the required perpendicular maneuvering clearance.
- The property failed to carry its burden to show that constructing either an ADA-compliant dropdown-style or parallel-style curb ramp was not readily achievable. The supplemental evidence therefore did not warrant a new trial or modification of the final judgment.
Key quotations
“Temporary disruptions of passageways normally do not run afoul of the ADA.” (at 7)
“The property has not carried its burden to show that constructing an ADA-compliant ramp is not readily achievable.” (at 10)
“The new evidence does not support finding that neither a dropdown-style curb ramp nor a parallel-style curb ramp is readily achievable.” (at 11)
Factual background
The strip center at 5860 San Felipe in Houston contains Fu's Garden Chinese Restaurant and other businesses open to the public. The curb ramp adjacent to Fu's Garden was not ADA-compliant, and the court previously determined that a dropdown-style or parallel-style curb ramp could correct the deficiency. The property presented expert opinions asserting that the proposed ramps would narrow the sidewalk, interfere with door maneuvering clearance, create safety and permitting problems, and impose excessive costs. The court found that the record did not substantiate those assertions.
Procedural history
Thomas sued 5860 San Felipe Ltd. under the ADA as a wheelchair-using tester alleging architectural barriers at a Houston strip center. Following a bench trial, the court found that Thomas had standing and that replacing or modifying the curb ramp adjacent to Fu's Garden was readily achievable, while rejecting several other requested modifications. The property obtained a new trial on the feasibility of the curb-ramp modification and supplemented the record, but the court held that the new evidence did not justify changing the final judgment.