The Wheelchair-Ramp Blues

When Harvard Real Estate (HRE) decided to purchase and renovate an apartment building at 18-20 Ware Street, it encountered a costly problem: the size of the project seemed to mean that to comply with state law, HRE would be forced to install concrete wheelchair ramps and other equipment to make the building accessible to handicapped people.

Architect Stephen Tucker of Cambridge who received more than $10,000 from HRE for his work on 18-20 Ware Street and other buildings, spent some of his time trying to find a way around the law. And though HRE eventually installed the required modifications to the Ware Street apartments, Tucker's memo to HRE president Sally Zeckhauser and vice-president Robert Silverman provides a revealing look at one of the services tenants--as well as students and alumni--pay for as part of HRE's daily business operations.

Tucker's memorandum dated December 15, 1978, states:

"Today I went to City Hall to determine the assessed value of 18-20 Ware Street. This figure is of interest since it plays a role in determining the degree to which the Massachusetts Architectural Barriers Board rules will apply to the renovation.

"The present assessment for 18-20 Ware Street is listed at $237,200 for the building and $17,800 for the land--a total of $255,000. This represents an estimated 39 per cent of the "Fair Market Value." The Barriers Board regulations do not allow consideration of land value. Therefore, 18-20 Ware has a value of $237,200 /.39 equals $608.205 for the purpose of determining the extent of compliance required under the statute.

"The regulations require total compliance if the costs of renovation work exceed 25% of the fair market value. The construction cost is taken as the cost listed on the application for the building permit.

"At a construction cost of between 5% and 25% of the market value where construction value exceeds $50,000, "that portion of the work being done shall comply" plus an "accessible entrance and a toilet useable by a person in a wheelchair shall be provided." I questioned the toilet and the Board's secretary said that this wouldn't apply in the case of an apartment house.

"The 25% figure, when applied to $608,200, is rather dangerously near the (informal) project budget, especially if the cost of the mandatory ramp and lift is counted in.

"I though we might get some elbow room by splitting the project into roof work and interior finishes. However, after discussion with the Building Department it appears that a building permit will be required for the roof. This will put the cost of the roof on the record. A further provision of the Barriers Board regulations requires adding together the cost of all separate building permits issued in any 24 month period for the building. This could put us in a bit of a bind.

"Relief from the provisions if the regulations can be sought formally if cost estimates exceed the $152,000 trigger level (25% of $608,000). (I don't want to guess our chances).

"What are the economic consequences of exceeding the 25% figure? Since we are obliged to provide access in any event, and, if we renovate baths and kitchens, we are probably obliged to create three accessible apartments and given that the Board does not try to nail us for two elevators, then we may already have bought most of the items which could reasonably be required under full compliance. I would not care to be quoted on this until I have had the opportunity of going over the plans in a meeting with the Board and until the cost of the estimate is complete."

In response to inquiries about the memo, HRE officials provided a written statement, which reads in part: "HRE's policy is to comply with applicable state and local codes. HRE has no comment on what Mr. Tucker may or may not have been proposing...for your information...after the work was done to provide access for the handicapped, HRE had considerable difficulty finding handicapped tenants to occupy the building."

Tucker said his work on the Ware Street building "was one of a series of projects I did on a standing basis" and that "no one solicited my opinion on avoiding regulations."

"There was a question as to whether the cost of the renovation would exceed the trigger level" for handicapped modifications, Tucker stated, adding that "complying with handicapped regulations is part of any renovation."

"I didn't do anything immoral. In fact we invested a good deal more money than was required in order to comply with the spirit of the law, not just the narrow technical requirements." Tucker said, explaining that "three nice handicapped apartments, a lift, a ramp, and other accoutrements" were provided by HRE.