The Niagara Region’s joint accessibility advisory committee awarded several local businesses this spring for their efforts in making their places accessible, including four in Niagara-on-the-Lake.
But two of the NOTL committee members who helped decide who got those awards said that, despite what four businesses are doing, the situation is far from ideal for people with disabilities in NOTL.
Dave Antaya, a committee member since 2018, said he has been involved in accessibility issues for more than 40 years.
He said that despite the 20-year-old Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, mandating that businesses in Ontario become wheelchair accessible by Jan. 1, 2025, many businesses in the town are simply inaccessible to people living with disabilities.
In 2023, Pamela TurnerSmith, a NOTL resident with mobility issues, told The Lake Report that she couldn’t get into 60 per cent of the businesses on Queen Street.
Antaya said the situation has not changed in that area much since then.
“Merchants in general throughout the entire town are quite inaccessible in many ways,” he said. “Steps to get into buildings, access to be able to move around within the building, washrooms, and all kinds of different things.”
Lauren Bubnic, the other member of the committee from NOTL, goes further, saying that the problem goes from not having an accessible indoor walking track and elevator at her local community centre to other kinds of accessible innovations that many people are commonly used to.
“There aren’t enough automatic doors in the town,” she said. “There aren’t enough accessible washrooms, and all the businesses have multiple steps.”
“One business did make a graded ramp of their own (in the downtown),” said Bubnic. “But that was the only improvement that I’ve seen.”
The issues here provoke a common response from businesses in the Historic Old Town.
A common complaint from them is that their heritage status makes it difficult, expensive and contradictory under local bylaws to retrofit buildings with accessible ways to enter and go through their premises.
This view was also expressed by Lord Mayor Gary Zalepa, who said, “We have an extensive heritage district that creates challenges to accessibility that other municipalities don’t have.”
Both Bubnic and Antaya said there was some merit to this point, but neither of them believes this is a real obstacle that overrides the need for accessibility.
Both, in fact, believe that making heritage buildings accessible can increase their revenue in the long run.
“These 100-year-old buildings didn’t used to have things like sprinkler systems,” said Bubnic. “But it’s mandated now. So, things like automatic doors and the ability for people with walkers to get in … should be something that’s 101.”
Gabriel Reznick, a staff lawyer for Toronto-based disability law firm ARCH Disability Law Centre, said that heritage laws do not give people the right to not provide what people with disabilities are owed.
“Any heritage law would still need to comply with human rights legislation,” he said.
So, with a problem of accessibility that has been known for decades, what is taking so long for it to be solved?
Antaya believes this problem begins at the top, with enforcement by the provincial government, going all the way to the town and local businesses.
“The (Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act) is a law,” said Antaya. “But there is no cop on the planet that would be in a position to enforce the law. It’s being ignored by the government from the top down.”
Bubnic said that a voluntary system does exist in the town of NOTL for complaints relating to accessibility, but that the lack of enforcement makes it difficult to really create an accessible world.
“There’s no policing around that,” she said. “It’s not like public health where if a business is not compliant, you can report them. I’m not aware of any bylaws they can use.”
“The (Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act) is a provincial thing. There’s a voluntary system, but it’s legislated. There’s a gap there.”
When asked why businesses were so slow to comply with people with disabilities, Antaya said, “It’s simple, money.”
Given the awards sent out this year, Antaya was asked why some businesses have done better at making their businesses more accessible.
He said that pressure to do so was a major contributing factor, and that government facilities tended to be more compliant.
“The municipal, provincial and federal facilities have been hardcore compliant,” he said.
Zalepa also highlights what the town has done for its facilities relating to accessibility. One of the NOTL buildings to receive an award this year was the local community centre.
“Our own facilities that are publicly owned, where we can build new properties or do new renovations, are AODA compliant,” said Zalepa. “Which is the key thing that our town has direct control over.”
Bubnic agrees that the public sector buildings have typically done better than the private sector at providing accessible services.
But she also hopes that there can be different incentives for private businesses to become compliant with the AODA, as the current reality does not bring about change.
“They’re just sitting back and waiting for funding,” said Bubnic.
Antaya said that making businesses more accessible is ultimately something which benefits the business as much as it benefits those with accessibility needs. But he believes that a lot of things need to happen before more people with mobility issues can get the same access to the world as those without them.
“There’s no classic ‘snap your fingers’ approach,” he said.
The four businesses that were given the Accessibility Matters Here award by the advisory committee in Niagara-on-the-Lake were the NOTL Community Centre, Southbrook Winery, Jackson-Triggs Winery and the Bank of Montreal, NOTL Branch.
Marah Minor, the town’s communications coordinator, said the town “continues to enhance accessibility through digital tools, facility upgrades and inclusive design.”
