This page provides resources on legislation relevant to visitable housing. The first section features the texts of major laws on housing that include some accessibility requirements (but accessibility is not the main focus of these laws). Resources in the second section include (1) texts of laws that have been passed or proposed to specifically require visitable housing features, and (2) information that can be used to understand and advocate for visitable housing legislation.
Housing Legislation with Accessibility Requirements
- Fair Housing Act, Hawaii Revised Statutes, Chapter 515, Discrimination in Real Property Transactions. This act of the Hawaii State Legislature mirrors the national Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988. Like the national act, the Hawaii act only requires that accessible features be provided in “multifamily housing accommodations” built with government funding supports for occupancy after March 13, 1991. There are no accessibility requirements for single-family detached homes, duplexes, triplexes, and multiple-story townhouses without elevators. (Word Doc, 10 pages, 30 Kilobytes)
- Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988, 42 USC § 3601-3619, PL 100-430, 102 Stat. 1619. This act of the US Congress only requires that accessible features be provided in “multifamily housing accommodations” built with Federal funding supports for occupancy after March 13, 1991. There are no accessibility requirements for single-family detached homes, duplexes, triplexes, and multiple-story townhouses without elevators. (PDF, 36 pages, 350 Kilobytes)
- Frank Melville Supportive Housing Investment Act of 2010. This act of the US Congress has some requirements to ensure that supportive housing is accessible to residents with disabilities. (PDF, 11 pages, 150 Kilobytes)
- Primer on Fair Housing Law (2014). This booklet outlines the broad contours of fair housing law. It is published by the Fair Housing Legal Support Center and Clinic of the John Marshall School of Law. (PDF, 32 pages, 2 Megabytes)
Visitable Housing Legislation
AARP
- Expanding Implementation of Universal Design and Visitability Features in the Housing Stock (July 2017). This publication of the AARP Public Policy Institute was authored by Shannon Guzman, Janet Viveiros, and Emily Salomon. It explains universal housing design and visitability, and describes possible mandatory and voluntary legislative approaches for promoting such housing. (PDF, 6 pages, 1 Megabyte)
- State Inclusive Home Design Advocacy Toolkit (2014). This publication of AARP in the States provides comprehensive guidance for advocating for visitable housing standards at the state level. Four model state ordinances are provided, but none are mandatory for ALL new housing. Instead, they are limited in scope (e.g., applying only to construction with Federal funding supports) and/or rely on taxpayer-funded incentives. (PDF, 136 pages, 14 Megabytes)
Austin, Texas
- Visitability Ordinance #20140130-021, City of Austin (2014). This ordinance requires that designs for new single-family and duplex housing meet basic visitability standards in order to qualify for building permits. (PDF, 3 pages, 220 Kilobytes)
Bolingbrook, Illinois
- Assuring Accessible Housing – Visitability Code of the Village of Bolingbrook (2008). This policy analysis by Katherine Fuller examines the pros and cons of mandatory visitability legislation, such as that of Bollingbrook, versus non-mandatory legislation that instead offers tax-payer funded incentives to builders and developers. (PDF, 17 pages, 360 Kilobytes)
- Visitable Housing Code of Bolingbrook, Illinois (2004). This visitable housing code is often cited, along with that of Pima County, as strong evidence that mandatory requirements (1) come to be accepted by builders when they realize additional costs are minimal, (2) rapidly lead to an increase in the stock of visitable housing, and (3) enhance the marketability of homes. (PDF, 3 pages, 15 Kilobytes)
- Visitability: The Way of the Future in Home Building (2004). This article in the Illinois Municipal Review, by Bolingbrook mayor Roger Claar and attorney James Boan, describes why the village received the Illinois Municipal League’s 2004 Innovations Award for its implementation of visitable housing standards. (PDF, 2 pages, 780 Kilobytes)
Hawaii State Legislature
During the half year before the Legislature’s 2018 session began in January, the Hawaii Visitable Housing Coalition worked with the Legislature’s Kupuna Caucus to develop two visitable housing bills. Kupuna is the Hawaiian word for elders. The Kupuna Caucus brings together Senators and Representatives who are committed to legislating on behalf of Hawaii’s elders. Our introduction of the concept of visitable housing appealed to them because such housing can support elders to age-in-place. The Kupuna Caucus therefore included these two bills (with a Senate and House version of each) in its 2018 legislative package. Hawaii’s leading newspaper, the Honolulu Star-Advertiser, strongly supported the bills in an editorial that followed a front-page cover story about the many advantages of requiring new housing to be visitable. Even so, all the bills died after approval by several committees because they were not heard by the final hurdle, either the Senate Ways and Means Committee or the House Finance Committee. Links to the bills and the Star-Advertiser newspaper materials are provided below.
- Senate Bill 2594 SD2 HD1 – Visitability standards requirement for publicly funded housing (not passed in 2018). If this bill or the companion House Bill 1919 were approved, Hawaii would have followed several other states in requiring that all new housing constructed with state financial support be visitable. (PDF, 5 pages, 120 Kilobytes)
- Senate Bill 2595 SD1 – Income tax credits for visitability standards (not passed in 2018). If this bill or the companion House Bill 1920 were approved, Hawaii would have joined a number of other states in offering tax incentives for meeting visitability standards in new housing or renovations. (PDF, 9 pages, 130 Kilobytes)
- State bills aim to make homes for disabled user-friendly – Honolulu Star-Advertiser front page feature story by Andrew Gomes, March 5, 2018. (PDF, 4 pages, 930 Kilobytes) At right is the graphic that covered much of the front page: a huge “6” inside of which the proposed six visitability standards are shown.
- Honolulu Star-Advertiser editorial in favor of visitable housing bills, Page A8, March 6, 2018. (PDF, 1 page, 250 Kilobytes)
Honolulu City and County, Hawaii
- Honolulu City Council Resolution 17-113 Urging the City Administration to Incorporate Visitability Standards in the City’s Building Code for New Residential Construction (April 2017). This resolution urges the Honolulu Department of Planning and Permitting to conduct an analysis of the feasibility of including six visitability standards in the building code for new residential construction. However, as of a year later, the Department had not responded. (PDF, 4 pages, 1 Megabyte)
Pima County and City of Tucson, Arizona
- Arizona Court of Appeals Unanimously Upholds Nation’s First Mandatory Visitability Ordinance (2003). This newspaper article describes the final outcome of a suit by the Southern Arizona Home Builders Association claiming that the Pima County visitable housing ordinance was “unconstitutional.” This claim was rejected in a unanimous decision by the Arizona Court of Appeals. (PDF, 2 pages, 100 Kilobytes)
- Letter on Pima County Visitability Success to US House Financial Services Subcommittee on Housing and Community Opportunity (2010). This letter was submitted by the Pima County Chief Building Official Yves Khawam to the US House Financial Services Subcommittee on Housing and Community Opportunity in support of the Eleanor Smith Inclusive Home Design Act of 2010. The letter explained that the Pima County mandatory visitability ordinance had resulted in a substantial increase in the stock of visitable housing without imposing cost burdens on either builders or the county, as had been feared. (PDF, 1 page, 150 Kilobytes)
- How Pima County Visitability Ordinance Was Developed and Passed. This PowerPoint presentation by Certified Building Official Clayton Trevillyan describes the steps in developing the ordinance and gaining approval (Pima County in 2002 and City of Tucson in 2007). (PDF, 15 pages, 610 Kilobytes)
- Tucson Inclusive Home Design Ordinance, with Synthesis and Commentary (2007). The first half of this document provides the text of the ordinance, which applied the Pima County ordinance of 2002 to Tucson (which is part of Pima County). The second half of the document provides commentary and interpretation and also indicates amendments made by the City of Tucson to the original Pima County ordinance. (PDF, 10 pages, 350 Kilobytes)
United States Congress
- Eleanor Smith Inclusive Home Design Act of 2015 – NOT PASSED. This act is named after the founder of Concrete Change, the organization credited with launching the visitable housing movement. It was first proposed in 2003 by Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D – IL) to require that all housing built with Federal funds have a no-step entrance, 32″ clearance doorways on the main level, and at least one wheelchair-accessible bathroom. Currently 95% percent of federally supported homes do not have to meet accessibility standards. (PDF, 9 pages, 260 Kilobytes)
- Eleanor Smith Inclusive Home Design Act Will Make Homes Accessible (July 2016). In this Huffington Post blog post, Rep. Jan Schakowsky explains why she introduced the Eleanor Smith Inclusive Home Design Act, which would require all new homes built with Federal dollars to meet accessibility standards. (PDF, 2 pages, 560 Kilobytes)
Vermont State
- Vermont Statutes 20 V.S.A. § 2907 Accessibility Standards; Residential Construction (2012). This statute (first passed in 2002) stands out as the only state law that mandates visitable features in ALL new home construction (not just homes built with government funding supports). However, it lacks two important features: (1) external accessible path of travel to a no-step entrance, and (2) a wheelchair-accessible bathroom on the entry level. In addition, the law has had relatively little impact due to its lack of enforcement mechanisms. (Word Doc, 1 page, 100 Kilobytes)