CREJ - Multifamily Properties Quarterly - May 2017
Denver’s ever-growing population has spurred innovation and creativity in architecture, especially when it comes to apartment communities, but when could innovation mean breaking the law? New multifamily developments have been a staple here for several years and with that has come the escalation of construction costs, driving developers and architects to creative designs that maximize the use of space and minimize cost. Many times, in an effort for efficiency, room sizes shrink and critical accessibility considerations get overlooked. For developers, moving toward smaller layouts to increase unit counts also can mean a significant increase in liability. The Federal Fair Housing Act is a federal law that was amended to cover the design and construction of multifamily projects built after 1991. It applies to multifamily properties, whether they are apartments or condominiums, and the design requirements apply to buildings with four or more units. It applies to all dwelling units if the building has an elevator. In buildings with no elevator, only ground-floor dwelling units are required to comply. Noncompliance with the Federal Fair Housing Act creates costly issues during construction and can heavily impact the project schedule. It also can create headaches down the road if the property is sold and a buyer finds accessibility issues, leading to additional expenses for the seller. Thoughtful strategy can help avoid those problems and decrease liability from potential complaints or lawsuits. Compliance with the act translates into greater usability for everyone, not just those who are disabled. Fixture placement and clearfloor space are two requirements that can significantly impact the design and, in many cases, will limit how small a room can be. Efficiency units (studios) and micro units make heavy use of limited space, but rooms such as kitchens and bathrooms require thoughtful design and careful construction; otherwise, innovation may end up causing more problems than it solved. Shrinking the size of the kitchen may seem like a cost-beneficial move, but consider if the required 30-by-48-inch clear-floor area is no longer provided at a sink or appliance – the unit may be noncompliant with the Federal Fair Housing Act. When designing kitchens or reducing the overall size of the space, favor linear kitchens rather than “L” or “U” shapes. This gives the greatest flexibility to meet accessibility requirements and minimizes dead space in kitchen corners. Another strategy is to shift appliances and fixtures away from kitchen corners, allowing for greater usability by providing centered clearfloor areas at each. There are myriad ways to ensure an efficient, accessible kitchen, but each approach will require ample attention to clearances and adjacencies. Similarly, floor space in bathrooms is crucial for compliance with the Federal Fair Housing Act and future usability of the space. While relocating fixtures, omitting cabinetry or condensing the area overall are valid space-saving measures, the implication is that less space is dedicated to accessibility. In bathrooms, for example, the act requires a 30-by-48-inch clear-floor area outside of the door swing. If this area is not provided, the unit may be considered noncompliant with the act. Fixture clearances are another consideration that easily can be overlooked when the intent is to tighten up a space. Being cognizant of accessibility spatial requirements during the design phase, especially in kitchens and bathrooms, can minimize headaches, avoid costly errors, reduce tearing out noncompliant construction and ensure a higher level of usability throughout the project. Opting to design kitchens and bathrooms with slightly more space than is required is a strategy that can lower a developer’s risk by allowing for required minimums and building in construction tolerance. This approach affords the developer more flexibility with product selection, such as appliances and cabinetry, commonly handled well after construction begins. A gas or electric range, for example, is a seemingly straightforward selection, but consider that the size and layout of the kitchen determines whether that selection will maintain or impede required clear-floor areas. The addition of spatial tolerance many times rewards developers with options where there otherwise may have been none. There are many Federal Fair Housing Act requirements beyond clear floor areas such as requirements that stipulate the minimum size of doors, how deep a closet can be or even the height of a threshold. There are seven requirements in total, all of which follow the philosophy of greater tolerance and higher usability for a variety of people. Further, there are laws and standards beyond the Federal Fair Housing Act that may apply to your project including the building code, state laws (Colorado Revised Statutes 9-5), accessibility laws based on financing (Section 504), as well as the Americans with Disabilities Act. Taking a proactive approach to accessibility can help minimize the risk associated with efficiencies, micro units or any multifamily project. Such an effort also may appeal to future buyers. Maximizing a property’s appeal and value is a consideration of any developer, and proactive compliance with the act could minimize price negotiations in the future. There are great advantages to building efficient multifamily spaces, but with that comes great responsibility. As tighter spaces become more commonplace and as necessity leads to innovation, it is imperative that accessibility sits alongside creativity.