LAW OFFICES

SHUGHART
THOMSON
& KILROY
A Professional Corporation

Twelve Wyandotte Plaza

120 West 12th Street
Kansas City, Missouri 64105-1929
(819) 421-3344
FAX (816) 374-0509

32 Corporate Woods, Suite 1100

9225 Indian Creek Parkway
Overland Park, Kansas 66210-2011
(913) 451-3355
FAX (913) 451-3361

January 13, 1993

John Wodatch, Esq.

Section Chief
U.S. Department of Justice
Public Access Section
Civil Rights Division
P.O. Box 66738
Washington, D.C. 20035-6738

Dear Mr. Wodatch:

It has been suggested by an attorney in your department that

we write to you for a written interpretation of the Title III
Regulations of the Americans with Disabilities Act. We posed the
following facts and question verbally to your department on
January 4, 1993:

Fact Situation. owner desires to expand its existing

commercial facility by the addition of two stories of new
construction to be built on top of the existing one-story building,
and with other additions on the first level. The architect was
retained in May of 1991 and began discussing plans for the
alteration with the owner. In June and July, 1991, preliminary
plans were transmitted to the owner by the architect showing the
proposed new construction.
 Due to the location of new columns for the two-story addition,
an existing portion of the building (an attached prefabricated
building) was detached and relocated on the site in August, 1991.
Architectural plans are completed in January, 1992. New
construction begins in February, 1992.

191199 VI
01-02780​John Wodatch, Esq.
January 13, 1993
Page 2

Question. Does the relocation of the attached prefabricated

building constitute the beginning of "physical alteration of the
property" within the meaning of 28 C.F.R. S 36.402?

We understand that additions are deemed "alterations" under

ADAAG S 4.1.5 and are therefore governed by S 36.402. Although new
construction of the addition to the building did not begin until
after the January 26, 1992 effective date for Title III
alterations, site preparation included the relocation of this
building on the property. We have received a preliminary verbal
interpretation from the Deputy Section Chief that as long as there
were plans in existence at the time the building was relocated
showing the intended new construction, and that the relocation was
part of the contemplated plan for the new construction, then the
building relocation in August, 1991 constitutes the first "physical
alteration" to the property. As a result, the remaining new
construction performed in February, 1992 and thereafter on this
project is not required to be accessible under 28 C.F.R. S 36.402.

We look forward to receiving your written interpretation. If

you have any questions regarding the above fact scenario, or need
more information, please do not hesitate to call.

Very truly yours,

G. William Quatman
GWQ/Pjo
191189 VI

01-02781