Signed interpretation deals more with individuals whose hearing loss is too severe for ALS and who use sign language to communicate. ALS deals with hearing impaired individuals many of whom do not use sign language at all. I am pretty sure that providing only signing is not meeting ADA compliance.I like your sound guys idea, instead of working for what you need also consider future things... as far as the assisted hearing system, our Public school district just hires out a sign language person. ends up being cheaper and is more district friendly as far as usability in all 3 of the high schools.
Assembly areas
(b) This paragraph applies to assembly areas where audible communications are integral to the use of the space (e.g., concert and lecture halls, playhouses and movie theaters, meetings rooms, etc.). Such assembly areas, if (1) they accommodate at least 50 persons, or if they have audio-amplification systems, and (2) they have fixed seating, shall have a permanently installed assistive listening system complying with 4.33.
For other assembly areas, a permanently installed assistive listening system, or an adequate number of electrical outlets or other supplementary wiring necessary to support a portable assistive listening system shall be provided. The minimum number of receivers to be provided shall be equal to 4 percent of the total number of seats, but in no case less than two. Signage complying with applicable provisions of 4.30 shall be installed to notify patrons of the availability of a listening system.
Two totally separate issues, meeting code is a requirement regardless of budget, in theory if you can't build to code you can't build period. Code compliance during both the design and construction phases of a project must be verified and approved by the Authorities Having Jurisdiction for the building to be permitted and to later receive a Certificate of Occupancy. Discrepancies found and not corrected will result in not obtaining one or the other of these approvals required before a building can be built and occupied.well as with most high school setups only about 1/2 the building meets code, since its a lowest bid wins situation.
There may be an important distinction here that should be clarified. "Code" typically applies to issues that could affect the health, welfare and safety of the public. However, here are many other issues that relate to good design that are not "code" related. ADA is actually one of these, unless it is referenced in the local building codes it is not necessarily a "code" issue. ADA also works on non-compliance rather than compliance, a building typically does not have to be 'approved' as ADA compliant but instead must address any allegations of non-compliance, sort of innocent until proven guilty. But should someone file a formal complaint with the Department of Justice, then you may have to prove compliance, 'reasonable accommodation' or hardship or be subject to up to a $55,000 civil penalty ($110,000 for additional violations). The DoJ is usually quite fair, their goal is to get accommodations for the disabled rather than to issue penalties so they are more interested in getting compliance than in penalizing reasonable situations. The problem comes in that spending money on updating other aspects of a facility or system and not addressing ADA makes it potentially more difficult in the event of a complaint to argue that reasonable effort or accommodation was made in the past. Just thought it was worth a litte more complete discussion since it is easily misunderstood.
I have worked with a few A&H boards and had such bad experiences with them I just gave up on them... I guess I kinda got scared away from them...
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.