
Crema Coffee in San Jose Closes Due to ADA Lawsuit - fortran77
https://sanjosespotlight.com/access-v-abuse-crema-coffee-in-san-jose-closes-due-to-ada-lawsuit/
======
gopi
This google review for the attorney mentioned in that article is heartbreaking

Dear Tanya Moore, you don't know me, but I've been following your exploitation
of small business owners across the Bay Area for some time after you sued my
parent's Mom & Pop copy shop for minor ADA infractions. They never recovered
financially. From there followed a divorce and subsequent estrangement from
both their children after unbearable drama and suffering. Our family has never
been the same since you and Robert Kalani put a cloud over our lives. I want
you to know what kind of chain reaction your actions and how you chose to use
your law degree caused. Your aggressive tactics on small business owners who
are already barely surviving is frankly despicable and your immoral decisions
have negatively affected approximately 30+ people in just this one case. It
looks like your day of reckoning has recently come in July '19 and I hope
legislative changes follow as well.

[https://www.google.com/search?q=Tanya+E.+Moore&oq=Tanya+E.+M...](https://www.google.com/search?q=Tanya+E.+Moore&oq=Tanya+E.+Moore#lrd=0x808fcc999f6f1ed1:0xcc6de6b057e250b5,1,,),

~~~
networkimprov
Predators exist in many forms, not all of them masculine or violent.

------
rolleiflex
On one hand, this happens, on the other, I use hearing aids and I cannot get
Apple to give me a receipt for my AppleCare payment because the only way to
get that is to call an internal Apple department, and that department has no
email, no TTY, nothing but a phone number. I cannot call phones.

And Apple doesn’t care. What are you going to do, sue them for ADA violations?
That’s only for mom-and-pop coffee shops.

ADA has a purpose. However, it should be limited to corporations above a
certain revenue (like how GDPR is limited) and the cost of non-compliance
drastically increased. At this point, Apple can afford to be non-compliant
while this coffee shop has to close, which is the worst of all possible
worlds.

~~~
reaperducer
_I cannot call phones._

I thought it was possible for deaf people to call 711 and get an operator to
relay the call. We get relay calls like that in our call center frequently.

~~~
rolleiflex
Ideally this should work, but this involves the patience of other person to
wait for you to type in, and the text that comes your way to be accurate. In
my experience, unless you’re calling a TTY-specific number of a company,
neither will be in plentiful supply, and I’ve had people just drop the call
once they realise what’s happening.

~~~
jojobas
Don't TTY operators explain what's happening upfront?

~~~
_whiteCaps_
In my experience, yes, they do. I worked as tech support for an ISP and had
customers call in for support using a TTY relay. The operator explained it up
front, then started the conversation.

If I had dropped the call because of that, I'm sure my manager would have been
very unhappy.

------
zcase
Here's the suit PDF if anyone wants to read.

[https://www.sanjoseinside.com/wp-
content/uploads/2020/01/Cre...](https://www.sanjoseinside.com/wp-
content/uploads/2020/01/Crema-ADA-Lawsuit-2018.pdf)

The message seems to be: this is a nice thing, I can't readily access it, so
nobody should have it. Like the kid taking his ball away after losing at
soccer. Except this is someone else's ball?

Open to changing my view

~~~
samcal
Comparing being in a wheelchair to losing at soccer seems reductive to me.
Being in a wheelchair is completely life-changing and having public spaces
being accessible is a very good thing for the quality of life of people being
in this terrible situation.

The ADA has dramatically improved accessibility for those with mobility
impairments:

" When asked whether access to public facilities had improved, 75 percent or
more of respondents in 1994, 1998, and 2000 reported that they had perceived
improvement. Not surprisingly, the percentage of people with disabilities
going out to restaurants regularly has increased from 34 percent in 1986 to 57
percent in 2004."[0]

[0]:
[https://ncd.gov/rawmedia_repository/f493e262_8a9e_49c8_ad84_...](https://ncd.gov/rawmedia_repository/f493e262_8a9e_49c8_ad84_404a1b91d7c3.pdf)
pg 45

~~~
imgabe
Having access to facilities _is_ very important, but that is not what was
achieved here. Now the facility is gone and nobody can access it.

If the goal was to increase access to this facility, it failed miserably.

~~~
tehwebguy
It’s not the plaintiff’s fault that the defendant preferred to close up shop
vs comply with the law, even if they are the one who pointed it out.

~~~
tarsinge
The defendant is a small business = real humans you can talk to. Maybe they
could have explained that they did not have the money yet but could gladly
bring coffee outside with more service in the meantime. It's easy to hide
being legalism (especially for us engineers who like logical systems) and
ignore the human factor and individual moral choices. Yes legally the
plaintiff has the right to ruin a small business. But it's not necessary the
right choice.

~~~
altec3
Totally. For example, if your neighbors are having a party that's breaking
noise laws, it's always better to go talk to them, then if they are jerks,
report them to the police.

------
Baeocystin
We lost a great pizza place down here in Gilroy for the same predatory-ADA
reason. The owners were/are great folks, and deserved better. I've known many
small businesses that have had this kind of issue, too, and almost without
exception the suit had no moral merit. It's infuriating, and I say this as
someone who is very much in favor of ADA-style accommodations in general. But
they way things currently work as written is fundamentally broken.

~~~
jxramos
I see the topic getting covered in a local newspaper pretty frequently.

* [https://padailypost.com/2019/03/22/another-business-hit-with...](https://padailypost.com/2019/03/22/another-business-hit-with-an-ada-lawsuit-by-a-frequent-plaintiff/) * [https://padailypost.com/2018/01/05/2-local-restaurants-settl...](https://padailypost.com/2018/01/05/2-local-restaurants-settle-ada-lawsuits-brought-by-frequent-litigants/)

A lot more can be seen in this site search, they really follow these stories
and do a good job raising awareness of the problem:
[https://duckduckgo.com/?q=site%3Ahttps%3A%2F%2Fpadailypost.c...](https://duckduckgo.com/?q=site%3Ahttps%3A%2F%2Fpadailypost.com+ada+lawsuit&ia=web)

There's a real good in depth outline of the whole subject covered by Mark
Pulliam who used to practice in CA. [https://www.city-journal.org/html/ada-
litigation-monster-151...](https://www.city-journal.org/html/ada-litigation-
monster-15128.html)

------
eadmund
This is what is known in the common law as barratry: lawsuits filed not for
justice but for profit.

~~~
nemo44x
There’s a guy in NYC who does this and shuts small businesses down that can’t
afford to make the required changes. It’s usually a small restaurant with a
bathroom down narrow stairs that would cost a fortune to renovate to modern
code. It feels like an exploitation of the law.

There’s another guy recently who has been trying to shakedown small businesses
by threatening a huge lawsuit if they don’t pay him 50k to go away. He uses a
wheelchair but it’s a prop as he was found out to be able to walk.

Anything new, sure it should be accessible. Old building’s where it would cost
a fortune? It’s not practical.

~~~
astura
>He uses a wheelchair but it’s a prop as he was found out to be able to walk.

I don't know anything about this guy specifically but I just want to point out
many wheelchair users have some ability to stand and walk. Merely having the
ability to walk doesn't necessarily mean someone's wheelchair is a "prop" or
unnecessary.

[https://www.realsocialskills.org/blog/respecting-
wheelchair-...](https://www.realsocialskills.org/blog/respecting-wheelchair-
users-who-can-walk)

[https://www.dailydot.com/irl/ambulatory-wheelchair-users-
exi...](https://www.dailydot.com/irl/ambulatory-wheelchair-users-exist-annie-
segarra/)

------
jeffrogers
Possibly relevant to the spirit of the lawsuit... the other Crema location
mentioned at the end of the article is almost directly across the street. This
second location is at street level and accessible by wheelchair. I’m all for
enabling access, but in this case, I’m also left wondering if the plaintiff
was actually denied access to Crema’s products or services. The law is the
law, but the spirit seems off here.

------
reverend_gonzo
A question, if there is someone that can answer this:

It said her options were either build a ramp for $100k or settle for $60k. Who
can she settle with, and who agrees that she doesn’t need to build a ramp
anymore? What happens if someone else comes along and wants a ramp?

~~~
55555
Can someone explain to me why a ramp costs $100k?

~~~
reaperducer
I don't know anything about the building, but I can easily see how that could
happen.

Lawyers. Architects. Permits. Construction. Traffic control during
construction. Environmental studies. Heck, even archeological studies if it's
the right area. Maybe even soil remediation if it's determined there's
anything below the ramp, like oil or radon, or who knows what.

Plus, if any of it touches the sidewalk, you might have to pay the city rent
every month for as long as the building stands.

~~~
JoeAltmaier
Or, put plywood over half those steps? Probably its not the steps - its the
doorway being rebuilt. On a historic building.

~~~
LorenPechtel
Plywood over half the steps would be far too steep.

~~~
JoeAltmaier
Yeah, but there's that long bottom step. Extend it all the way to ground
level? Anyway, sad to lose this business.

------
WheelsAtLarge
People get upset over this kind of cases but not being able to access a
business is as discriminatory as the business shutting the door to someone
because there's something the business does not like about that person.
Discrimination is discrimination.

The ADA act has made a huge difference in people's lives since it's passage in
the '90s. We see these stories over and over which, is important to keep in
mind, the exception not the rule. The majority of buildings are built ADA
compliant now and most older buildings can be modified relatively
inexpensively.

Yes, this was the exception but even, in this case, the business was merged
with another local building.

One thing people always forget is that we all get old and many of us will end
up with mobility limitations and we will be glad that a business is ADA
compliant and we have the ability to access it.

~~~
gpm
Like the ADA or not, this sentence is not true

> People get upset over this kind of cases but not being able to access a
> business is as discriminatory as the business shutting the door to someone
> because there's something the business does not like about that person.

There is a _huge_ difference, morally and legally, between

\- Not spending $$$ on accommodating people.

\- Not going out of your way to accommodate people.

\- Closing your door in the face of potential business because you don't like
people.

It so happens that the ADA prohibits all of them (Edit: Language quoted below
makes me unsure about whether or not it actually fully prohibits the first),
many other anti-discrimination laws do not, and certainly I do not view
someone who does the first the same as someone who does the third.

~~~
WheelsAtLarge
>I do not view someone who does the first the same as someone who does the
third.

This is exactly why we have the law in the first place. If a group of people
vs another can't access a business then it's discrimination. Which means a
whole group can't get the services they need. If everyone felt like you did
then stores, parks, schools and so many more services that are essential to
life would be inaccessible to that group.

------
intopieces
Headline is misleading due to last paragraph:

“While the 950 Alameda location permanently closed Friday, coffee aficionados
can visit the other Cafe Crema location at 1202 Alameda. ”

One has to wonder whether this was anticipated given the new location is 2
blocks away.

~~~
CaliforniaKarl
I'm pretty sure that is not true, because (as someone who has been to both
locations) the original location was too busy. The staff I talked to at the
second location also told me that the second location was opened because the
first location was so busy. And the article references this also:

"Over the years, the shop grew into a well-recognized brand, leading Tran to
open another location down the street in 2017."

~~~
DataWorker
But she can’t afford to comply with laws and regulations that all other
business owners must? 100k for a wheelchair ramp? Come on.

~~~
intopieces
I doubt the case is that the business couldn’t come up with the money - she
could have taken a loan, for example - but more likely it just wasn’t worth
the investment given the success of the much larger location within walking
distance.

~~~
blaser-waffle
As mentioned above, it may be a 60k to settle, 100k+ to build something
compliant, or close down (and maybe move to another location).

It's not hard to see why it's not worth the investment. Shut it down, take the
breach of contract hit on the rent, and then use that would-be-ADA-compliance
loan to pick up at a different location.

------
frandroid
What I'm trying to figure out is how is this not the landlord's responsibility
rather than the commercial tenant's?

~~~
thedance
Virtually all business leases are "triple net", with the tenant being on the
hook for every expense from taxes to casualty to maintenance and improvements.
Commercial landlords aren't some kind of essential component of American
capitalism, they are just jerks who live at the beach and have no skin in the
game.

------
jxramos
> But under California law, a disabled person cannot claim money if they send
> the business owner a letter with their complaint first.

Seems like a decent thing to do to at the least raise an issue with a business
owner and bring it to their attention, ideally face to face.

> ...businesses are not given warnings or a “grace period” to correct
> violations. > > Plaintiffs can simply sue with little or no notice. That’s
> why law firms like Moore’s can easily swoop in with a lawsuit.

Seems like businesses should be given a chance first. Seems like the barrier
is too low to get these lawsuits dealt out. Give folks a fair chance. This may
even be an opportunity for some civic body of volunteers or even a chamber of
commerce to proactively approach businesses in advance and get them into
shape.

~~~
satyrnein
Face to face? The issue is they can't get up the stairs to the door.

That said, I don't understand why sending a letter should cost you there
ability to claim damages later.

~~~
jxramos
Sure, a phone call should suffice to arrange some face to face discussion.
They'd basically call to arrange meeting at a more accessible location, even
if its only the sidewalk immediately outside.

I don't understand that restriction either about forfeiting damages. I'm not
sure the details precisely, but I'm of the opinion of second chances and a
three strikes you're out sort of deal here. Maybe not literally three but
obstinate refusal to address the problem.

------
nimish
ADA is not exactly a new law -- it was over a decade old when Tran set up
shop.

It's entirely on her (and her real estate surveyor) for not doing the
diligence to ensure that her coffee shop was accessible. I can't shed too many
tears here, since she's got a profitable business; enough to expand.

ADA accessibility is great. Not just for the disabled, but for everyone with
reduced mobility. Ever tried to get around old European cities? It's tough
even for the able bodied. Imagine that, every day, for those who are
permanently with reduced mobility, including the elderly, sick, pregnant, or
otherwise handicapped.

~~~
stickfigure
Yes, I have spent quite a lot of time in old European and colonial cities.
They have charm in exactly the way that US cities do not, and it's a shame. I
wish US cities were a lot more like European cities and a lot less like
corporate strip malls.

I would be wholly in favor of repealing (or at least seriously limiting) the
ADA. Yes, it sucks to be mobility impaired, but we don't need to bring the
whole world down to the lowest common denominator.

~~~
calcifer
> we don't need to bring the whole world down to the lowest common
> denominator.

... says the man who isn't disabled.

~~~
backupcavalry
While I get what you mean, he's right: there's a line that's going to get
drawn somewhere, like as not. Now where exactly is something beyond my ken but
there are definitely things that will never be viable for the disabled.

In all honesty? I'd rather devote the resources to helping disabled people
function fully (or near-fully) again. But that in of itself is sort of wishful
thinking.

~~~
mondoshawan
I would love to be able to walk just like anyone normal. Instead, I deal with
major pain every day of my life because assholes like you refuse to build in
basic, small things like a fucking chair to sit on while waiting, usually
because "it would hurt the asthetics" or some dumb notion like it (ie: apple
store, malls, amusement parks...).

ADA is the lowest common denominator. Its not asking for you to rebuild a
whole building -- it asks for reasonable concessions to be made -- and its
absolutely _amazing_ how business owners go _out of their way_ to make it
harder on themselves and the disabled.

What I don't understand is this "line" that "must be drawn" I've seen from you
and others: the point is to negotiate and find a compromise between the
disabled and the owner within reasonable limits. The fact that businesses and
public institutions are unwilling to play ball and throw their toys out of the
pram every time this comes up is amazing and sad that it even comes to that
point. Usually because upfront investment in the material/business is smaller
and usually beneficial for everyone in the long run!

In TFA, crema bought the location _years_ after ADA was already law. The fact
that it became a risk to them now is unsurprising, and the fact that they're
closing that location is sad for both parties.

The fact that it's also possibly a predatory lawsuit is also sad, and I hope
something that can be rectified -- but I'm also not surprised to hear of such
high numbers of lawsuits over the problem, given how old the law is now, and
given how many places I have been to in the valley that don't have ramps.

------
c0nsilienc3
I think you guys really ought to read about the lawyer that was only briefly
highlighted in the article:

[https://www.almanacnews.com/news/2019/07/07/judge-finds-
witn...](https://www.almanacnews.com/news/2019/07/07/judge-finds-witness-
tampering-in-ada-lawsuit)

------
brudgers
Thirteen years ago ADA had been law for sixteen years. The owner ignored it
from day one. The owner had 13 years to bring the cafe into compliance.

~~~
nkrisc
And in all that time they may have never been able to afford it. Perhaps the
city should just demolish the building and build an ADA-compliant one on the
taxpayer's dime.

~~~
brudgers
Suppose the shop sells one item per minute, is open twelve hours a day, and
six days a week. Allocating $0.10 per item is $6.00 per hour, $72.00 per day,
and $21,000.00 per year. Over 13 years, that's more than a quarter million
dollars and more than twice the claimed cost of the ramp. For context, we are
talking a dime per item in Silicon Valley. Per this website, a small cup of
coffee is $2.00. [https://zmenu.com/crema-coffee-roasting-co-san-jose-
online-m...](https://zmenu.com/crema-coffee-roasting-co-san-jose-online-menu/)

~~~
nkrisc
10 cents might very well be the margin on a cup of coffee. But from the little
I know of the food service industry, that might be generous.

------
codezero
I could have sworn that ADA had provisions to protect buildings that were
older and where upgrades would be too costly to implement. This sounds like
that is the case... What am I missing?

~~~
astura
Seems complicated...???

[https://www.burnhamnationwide.com/final-review-
blog/a-misund...](https://www.burnhamnationwide.com/final-review-
blog/a-misunderstood-area-of-ada-compliance-existing-facilities)

>Title III also specifically states that for public accommodations
discrimination includes “failure to remove architectural barriers . . . in
existing facilities” unless it can be shown that removing a barrier is “not
readily achievable” or accommodations cannot be provided through other means.
(See 42 U.S.C. Section 12182(b)(2)(iv)&(v))

>The ADA defines readily achievable as “easily accomplishable and able to be
carried out without much difficulty or expense.” The statutory definition also
provides factors to be considered in determining whether barrier removal is
readily achievable and recognizes what may be achievable for one business
might not be for another:

>The nature of cost of the required barrier removal;

>The financial resources of the involved facility or facilities;

>The number of people employed by the facility;

>The effect on the facility’s expenses and resources;

>Impact on the operation of the facility;

>Overall finances of the covered entity;

>The number of employees in the covered entity;

>The number type and location of its facilities;

>The type of operations of the covered entity, including the composition,
structure and functions of its workforce; and

>The geographic, administrative or fiscal relationship of the facilities at
issue to the covered entity.

>(See 42 U.S.C. Section 12181(9))

------
oh_sigh
Clearly the ADA lawsuits are weaponized by people looking for quick paydays
via settlements, but on the other hand, this building is clearly not
accessible, and it isn't just a "small, “technical violation” that can be
easily fixed if a letter is sent to the business owner".

I think the real question is - why do purchasers not fold ADA costs into their
asking price for old buildings? This building has not been ADA compliant since
before the current owner bought it. She(or her agent) should have been aware
that they should actually be getting a $100k discount on the building if she
needs to install ramps there to make it legal to run a business.

~~~
alistairSH
Yes, but the best (most benefit to society) solution is likely building
inspectors verifying compliance when buildings/business change hands. Not
plantiffs demanding sums of money to be paid personally that could be put
towards the remediation.

~~~
oh_sigh
I completely agree. The fact that a complainant can demand money to drop the
suit on a personal payment seems wrong - I would like to see either reasonable
damages(I couldn't enter the coffee shop so my friend had to go in for me -
$10 damages), or only allow payoffs to be put into a general ADA fund and not
go to enrich the individual.

------
zeruch
I was one of the last artists to show there a few months back. It was a really
cozy, laid back spot. These kinds of ADA lawsuits are malicious and the
perpetrators should be themselves disbarred.

------
nojvek
This article shows everything wrong with America. Lawyers abusing laws and
finding loopholes to satisfy their personal greed at the expense of small
businesses and communities.

Current America really isn’t small business friendly but more optimized for
large corporations. This can’t be good for the future.

~~~
satyrnein
What's the loophole? This establishment is breaking the law as it is currently
written.

Perhaps you want an exemption for small businesses (which others might call a
loophole).

------
ngneer
Not an expert, but $100K claimed by the owner seems rather much. A third party
assessment would be good to procure. Given the touted popularity, cost would
be amortized, too. Maybe the owner derived what they had hoped out of the
business.

~~~
Nightshaxx
She mentioned the building is old. Maybe there are other structural issues
that would be brought up if a ramp was installed that would have to be delt
with. I don't know though, it's just a guess.

~~~
haroldl
Agreed.

"Crema Coffee owner June Tran said bringing her 100-year-old building up to
code would cost $100,000."

Bringing a 100-year-old building up to code != installing a ramp.

~~~
BurningFrog
But you need a building permit to install a ramp, and that may come with a
requirement to bring it up to code.

~~~
mondoshawan
Then she was already willfully ignorant of the law when she started, long
before ADA got involved.

------
satyrnein
This is the tradeoff of any regulation or law. Whether it's ADA compliance,
minimum wage, environmental regulation, or even just ordinary property rights,
there is always some break-even business somewhere that cannot afford $1 in
incremental cost to trim the tree growing over the property line (or
whatever).

There's no free lunch anymore, we are out of pareto improvements. Of course
ADA enforcement will cause some coffee shop somewhere to close. That in itself
doesn't tell you very much. You need a fuller cost benefit analysis to tell
you if the ADA is good legislation or not.

------
HammockTester
This always seemed very strange to me. If society deems it necessary for every
business to be accessible, then society (the government) should pay for it out
of tax revenue.

~~~
pmoriarty
Sure, as long as you don't mind us raising the tax rates to get the extra
money needed to support your proposal.

~~~
HammockTester
Well of course. It goes without saying that if I support the ADA then I should
be willing to fund it along with everyone else.

------
MrBuddyCasino
There has been a reform initiative proposed to prevent this, I can’t tell if
it was successful though: [https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-
bill/620](https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/620)

------
goatherders
I dont understand how it's a "predatory" lawsuit when it appears to actually
be valid.

------
tabtab
The law calls for "reasonable" accommodations. They could argue that folding
their biz is not reasonable. But, they'd probably need expensive lawyers to do
such, which would cause similar problems.

------
GaryNumanVevo
> The disabled man’s attorney, Tanya E. Moore, for years has been the subject
> of much scrutiny for suing thousands of small businesses across the South
> Bay, filing more than 1,400 ADA cases in recent years.

------
DataWorker
If her competitors have to spend money on ADA compliance why should this
particular business get a free ride. That would set a terrible presence as it
would penalize the good people and actually incentivize businesses
discriminating against disabled people. Sanjosespotlight is pretty trashy too.
The enquirer of South Bay clickbait journalism.

------
brians
Predatory? I don’t see the problem with demanding these businesses, or their
landlords, comply with the law to make them accessible.

~~~
erobbins
Do you believe this person suffered $60k in damages by not being able to buy a
coffee?

~~~
wlesieutre
It’s not necessarily about how much damages they suffered. Statutory damages
also serve as a deterrent and a way of motivating plaintiffs to pursue ADA
compliance suits.

In CA’s cast it looks like statutory damages are up to 3x the damages, with a
minimum of $4000. That minimum can apply multiple times, as in Hubbard v. Twin
Oaks Health and Rehabilitation.

> _Plaintiff asserts that, because the minimum statutory amount is $4,000.00
> per violation, and she encountered the architectural barriers a minimum of
> 15 times, she is entitled to damages in the amount of $60,000. Given that
> defendant does not present any viable evidence to the contrary, plaintiff
> will be awarded the statutory minimum of $4,000.00 per violation, totaling
> $60,000._

[https://www.leagle.com/decision/20041331408fsupp2d92311235](https://www.leagle.com/decision/20041331408fsupp2d92311235)

~~~
Dylan16807
The question is whether they were being predatory. Visiting 15 times to put a
multiplier on statutory damages, which were already 500x the actual damage, is
predatory.

$4000 is a nice kick in the pants but there should be a large delay before the
same person can get a second instance of statutory payout, if ever.

------
generalpass
Lots of comments on the $100k price tag for a ramp.

I used to work for a small manufacturer in San Jose. We wanted to build a
simple, 300 square foot room inside of a 27,000 square foot space that would
be attached to one of the space's walls.

What I found most interesting about the estimation process was that no matter
what type of structure (including pre-fab earthquake rated) we evaluated for,
we couldn't get anything out of city hall for less than total $20,000 spent,
with no guarantee that permits would actually be issued.

Then, for any contractor we hired (assuming they were available within the
next two years), their hourly rate rivaled the rates of downtown lawyers.

After this experience, I've concluded that most people who pretend to know
something about building something in Silicon Valley are just knowledgeless
windbags. I know I certainly had no idea how bad it truly is.

------
pbuzbee
$100,000 to replace stairs with a wheel chair ramp? Were more fixes necessary
than just this, or is that really how much it costs to create a wheel chair
ramp?

~~~
morio
Unfortunately $100K is not that much in the Bay Area. I had to spend $50K
total 10 years ago to make my side walk ADA compliant (as it is front of a bus
stop) when I bought my place in SF. They would not issue any further building
permits otherwise. And that was a fairly simple job without any stairs.

~~~
lightedman
"I had to spend $50K total 10 years ago to make my side walk ADA compliant (as
it is front of a bus stop) when I bought my place in SF. "

You got had. That sidwealk is public easement and if they demanded ADA work
for a public fixture (bus stop) it was on them to pay for it, not you.

~~~
morio
I wish that this is how it worked. The sidewalk was in 'significant disrepair'
and any repairs/replacements have to be ADA compliant:
[https://www.sfpublicworks.org/services/permits/sidewalk-
repa...](https://www.sfpublicworks.org/services/permits/sidewalk-repair)

------
pkaye
Seems like the building owner should be obligated to make the changes to the
building.

------
mirimir
But wait, how does closing just this location resolve the lawsuit?

She has another coffee shop, and a restaurant, and says that she'll be
incorporating the empty space into the restaurant.

So I guess that these are all incorporated separately?

~~~
mirimir
TFA ends with this:

> While the 950 Alameda location permanently closed Friday, _coffee
> aficionados can visit the other Cafe Crema location at 1202 Alameda_.
> [emphasis added]

So Cafe Crema is not going out of business. Just the one location is closing.

And there's also this:

> Tran said she could not meet the lawsuit’s demands to bring the entrance up
> to code, claiming it would cost her upwards of $100,000 to tear down and
> rebuild an ADA compliant ramp. The other option to opt for a settlement was
> not in the cards either, added Tran, who said she could not afford paying a
> massive $60,000 payout.

So if she didn't comply or settle, what happened to the lawsuit? From the
complaint,[0] the defendant is:

    
    
       CREMA COFFEE COMPANY LLC dba 
       CREMA COFFEE ROASTING COMPANY; 
       ALI FARHANG
    

So who owns the second location?

I was wrong about the restaurant, however. From TFA:

> The original Cafe Crema will be consolidated on Feb. 1 into Tran’s
> restaurant, Pier 402, located at 238 Race Street.

So I guess that entrance will no longer exist, solving the problem.

0) [https://www.sanjoseinside.com/wp-
content/uploads/2020/01/Cre...](https://www.sanjoseinside.com/wp-
content/uploads/2020/01/Crema-ADA-Lawsuit-2018.pdf)

------
pm24601
The landlord should not be allowed to rent this space out until it is ADA
compliant. It has been THIRTY years since ADA was passed. Enough! It should
not be the problem of the business renting the space.

------
nwallin
ADA, Americans with Disabilities Act. Not Ada the programming language.

I was expecting some bizarre coffee/Java riff with I dunno, TLD Systems or
something.

~~~
dang
Me too. But it turned out that "ada" was in a dictionary we use as part of
title processing, which caused it to get re-cased. Fixed now.

~~~
pvg
I worked on a project once where a doodad like that cleaned up Toys "R" Us to
Toys "R" United States.

------
booleandilemma
As someone with a relative who is handicapped I have little sympathy for
businesses that aren’t ADA compliant.

------
nmfisher
It costs $100,000 to build a ramp? That sounds insane (or an outright lie -
unless I'm just that out-of-touch with construction costs?).

~~~
sk5t
Ramps are surprisingly space-consuming, and might involve reconfiguring
doorways, gas lines or meters, water, electrical, mucking about with the
sidewalk, building railings and supports, and so on. $100k seems entirely
possible in a dense, expensive city. And you might be required to build a
masonry ramp. On the other hand, building a compliant wooden ramp to the porch
of a woodsy roadhouse might be far less costly.

------
droithomme
The ADA is a terrible law that should be repealed. It is primarily used by
these serial lawsuit trolls for their own payday.

New built businesses should be build to comply with the building code at the
time, which can include disabled access.

Older businesses can be upgraded, at taxpayer expense, if that's what the
government wants. It's insane and a violation of basic property rights to
force business owners to upgrade older buildings at their own cost.

