Which statement is true regarding the accessibility of housing units for disabled individuals?

The statement that owners must make modifications if no accessible units are available is true in many situations. Under the Fair Housing Act, for instance, housing providers are required to allow reasonable modifications for individuals with disabilities at their own expense when such modifications are necessary for them to have full enjoyment of their dwelling. This obligation is particularly emphasized if there are no already accessible units available in the property.

This requirement stems from the principle that everyone, regardless of disability, should have equal access to housing. In cases where a property lacks accessible options, the law supports the need for property owners to facilitate access through modifications. This can include changing certain features of the housing unit, provided that the modifications do not impose an undue financial burden on the owner or fundamentally alter the nature of the property.

The other choices present either misconceptions or limitations regarding accessibility obligations. For example, refusing to make modifications contradicts the supportive framework offered by housing laws. Additionally, compliance is applicable not only to municipal properties but also to private rental properties under certain conditions. Lastly, accessibility is a significant concern for rental properties and stands as a critical aspect to ensure equality in housing.