Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDisMinutes_2009_04_171 Brookings Committee for People who have Disabilities April 17, 2009 A meeting of the Brookings Committee for People who have Disabilities was held at 2:00 p.m. on Friday, April 17, 2009 in the Brookings City Hall with the following members present: Nancy Hartenhoff-Crooks, Kim Wells, Dave Miller, Lonnie Bayer, Jessie Kuechenmeister and Dona Kornbaum. Absent: Kurt Cogswell, Lisa Sonnenburg, Jeff Vostad, Dave Bertelson, and Alan Davis. Chair Dave Miller called the meeting to order. The next meeting of the committee was tentatively scheduled for either May 17th or May 29th. Staff was going to check regarding member availability. The agenda and March meeting minutes were approved. NEW BUSINESS Training Opportunities - Emily Bennett from Voc Rehab reported on the upcoming Leadership & Diversity Training Event on Wednesday, June 10 from 10 am to 3 pm at the Brookings Day’s Inn. Dr. Richard Pimentel is the keynote speaker. She suggested the Committee sponsor a booth at the event. Kuechenmeister volunteers to coordinate the booth design and staffing. Other members will be needed to help staff the booth from 9 am to 3 pm. Deadline to register for the events is May 31st. Thornes will coordinate registration and will help with the booth design. Bennett also provided information about the new summer stimulus work project through the SD Department of Labor. City Funding Request for 2010 Fiscal Year. Thornes reported that the city departmental funding process will be starting in May with a short deadline. The Committee will need to be prepared to take action at their next meeting. ADA Conference Call – April 23rd @ 11 a.m. The next conference call will provide training on the ADA Amendments Act. Crooks and Thornes plan to participate. UPDATES:  ADA Plan Review - South Dakota Children’s Museum. The Committee reviewed and approved the Plan Review Report (see attachment to minutes) and authorized the City Clerk to send to the Museum representatives.  Brookings Post Office. The enclosed official letter of complaint was filed with the Federal Access Board regarding accessibility concerns with the Brookings Post Office. Copies were provided to the members. April 6, 2009 Peg Blechman United States Access Board 1331 F Street, NW, Suite 1000 Washington, DC 20004-1111 RE: Accessibility Concerns - Federal Post Office, 500 Main Avenue, Brookings, SD 57006 Dear Ms. Blechman: 2 I am writing on behalf of the Brookings Committee for People who have Disabilities to bring to your attention accessibility concerns of the Federal Post Office building in Brookings, South Dakota. Our Committee is appointed by the Mayor and advocates for the rights of people who have disabilities in our community. The Committee strives to improve the quality of life for people who have disabilities through enhancing the knowledge base of the community and to further serve as a community-based advocacy group enhancing the ability of the community to comply with Federal Civil Rights legislation. Our group holds events throughout the year to bring awareness and information to Brookings citizens. We also provide technical assistance to the business owners, private individuals, governmental entities, and nonprofit organizations. A local resident contacted the City of Brookings and our Committee regarding the accessibility of the Brookings Post Office. Specifically, the complainant found it is very difficult and dangerous for someone in a wheelchair to open the front door on the west side of the building due to the door swing. In response, the Committee conducted multiple site visits at the Post Office and concurred with the complainant. The following accessibility concerns were found: 1) The direction in which the door opens and the door placement relative to nearby columns and steps make maneuvering from the accessibility ramp through dangerous for a person using a wheelchair or walker. 2) Worn hinges on the door result in intermittent sticking, which makes the door hard to pull open. 3) On the interior, all the customer counters are too high as were the counters in the service/preparation areas. In response, the Committee proposed the following access solutions to Post Office officials: 1. Reverse the swing of the front door so that the door pulls from left to right. That way the opening is in alignment with the ramp and is within the clear path of travel. However, closer inspection found that the door swing couldn’t be corrected without installing a new system. So the Committee investigated the cost for this solution and the estimated cost to replace the door and frame opening in the opposite direction would $4,208 - $5,250, depending on features and hardware incorporated. 2. Install an exterior automatic door opener on the building façade on the left side of the door unit. Although not required, a truly accessible solution would be to install the automatic opener and the estimate for the system and installation was $1500. 3. Reduce both interior doors’ opening force to 5 lbf or less by adjusting the hinges. The south interior door required 15 lbf and the north interior door required 11 lbf. Or, install an interior automatic door opener inside the vestibule for the south door that accesses the primary lobby space. 4. Lower one of the customer counters to compliant height and replace movable service tables with compliant tables. It should be noted when considering the cost to achieve these accessibility solutions listed above, that the Brookings Post Office recently replaced its exterior ramp to correct a slope/grade issue, reportedly spending $100,000. The Committee tried working with the local postmaster and his regional supervisor, but was unsuccessful. Our contacts at the Paralyzed Veterans of America in Sioux Falls and the Rocky Mountain DBTAC in Colorado Springs suggested we contact your office for assistance in this matter. Best regards, Dave Miller Chairperson, Brookings Committee for People who have Disabilities  Durable Medical Equipment Drive Update (SD Cares). Miller reported that Easter Seals no longer has an operation in South Dakota; however, the South Dakota Cares organization based in Pierre is similar and would like to work with the Committee on this project. The drive will be held from June 15 to 26. Mills Property Management will be willing to donate storage space again this year. Wells noted that ADVANCE has an abundance of used medical equipment and she will check to see if items could be 3 donated with this drive. Someone should also contact the Brookings Hospital about equipment. Promotion ideas: Town & County Shopper, posters, booth display, public service announcements.  Parking Brochure. Miller will coordinate with Wells on local pictures for the brochure with hopes of going to print soon. REPORTS: City ADA Coordinator’s Report.  Senior Center Parking Lot. The parking lot plan was included in the Children’s Museum project plan review.  City Bike Trail Plan Review. The Committee reviewed and concurred with the bike trail plan review (see attached to minutes). Thornes will provide to city officials.  SDSU Wellness Center. Miller, Cogswell and Thornes reviewed the draft report with the City Manager on April 7th. Miller and Thornes then met with SDSU officials on April 17 th to discuss concerns and suggested solutions.  Streetscape Compliance Review. Thornes didn’t have any updates on the parking space corrections other than the project is to start on May 11 th.  April 14th election. There were no accessibility problems at the April 14th election. NEADM Events: Hartenhoff-Crooks is making arrangements for the Walgreen’s corporate speaker to come for the October events and the easiest way to handle the Committee’s contribution may be to purchase her airline ticket. Correspondence/Announcements.  Wells is being reappointed as the Committee’s student representative.  April 25th is the Torch Run for Special Olympics Calendar: April 3rd – 9 am - Children’s Museum & Senior Center Lot Project Review April 15th – Noon-1:30 pm - “EEOC Grab Bag: Federal EEO Laws, EEOC Initiatives & Hot Employment Issues” 0 County Rooms (C&D) of the Swiftel Center April 23rd – 11 am – ADA Conference Call June 8-10- ADA Symposium, Kansas City June 15-26 – Durable Medical Equipment Drive May Agenda Items: ABLE Awards, Durable Medical Equipment Drive Meeting adjourned at 3:00 p.m. Submitted by Shari Thornes 4 ADA Review Project: Children’s Museum of South Dakota & Senior Citizen Center Parking Lot (Central Elementary School Building & Grounds) Date: April 3, 2009 April 17, 2009 – Reviewed & approved by Committee April 27, 2009 – Distributed Participants:  Maree Larson, Larson Foundation mlarson@larsondoors.com  Suzanne Hegg, Museum Director,  Nancy Hartenhoff-Crooks, Member, Committee & SDSU Disability Services Coordinator  Jessie Kuechenmeister, Member, Committee  Allyn Frerichs, Park, Recreation & Forestry Superintendent (present for senior center lot discussion only)  Shari Thornes, Brookings City Clerk & City ADA Compliance Officer (Primary Architect on Project - Lyle Pudwill, Landscape Architect, Confluence (lpudwill@thinkconfluence.com) Project Details: Group was invited to review the latest plans for the project. The Committee reviewed conceptual and shell documents in the early stages on July 31, 2009 and items were noted in that report. This report will provide comments on new issues or concerns. A. Interior Spaces 1) Entrance: Using automatic sliding doors in vestibule entrance. Comment: Sliding doors is an excellent choice. 2) Food Atrium:  At this time the plans for the food area/deli remain undecided. If the owners proceed with food service the Committee would re-emphasis accessibility of the tables, food ordering/counters, self-service areas, path of travel, and the path of travel surfaces. 3) Restrooms - Men‟s, Women‟s & Family Restrooms  Pursuant to Committee recommendations, the owner‟s design team have implemented children‟s accessibility standards into the design by staggering sink heights and incorporating accessible adult sinks & children height sinks in design.  The family restroom was redesigned to also incorporate both sink styles and an adult sized changing table as suggested by the Committee. Comment: Construction documents that provide the greater level of details were not available at this review. The Committee urged the project coordinators to be diligent in monitoring measurements and dimensions related to final stall, fixture and amenities installation paying particularly close attention to forward & side reach ranges, counter heights, and clear floor space. Close monitoring is needed to prevent construction variances which can occur due to final finishing/tile installation. 5 4) Meeting Rooms (Main level & 2nd level)  Pursuant to Committee‟s recommendations, the design now calls for roll-under sinks in the meeting room/play areas. 5) Former Gym  Bleachers will be removed so those are a non-issue.  Lower level locker room will be removed so the area is all at-grade. 6) Elevator The location of the elevator has changed, but remains the “hospital” size to accommodate exhibit and patrons, but will have interior finishes of a pedestrian elevator. No details on the elevator design yet. 7) Lockers At the last review, the Committee noted if locking units were provided, some at accessible height should be provided. The updated plans do not include any locking lockers, so this is no longer an issue. 8) Stairs: The plan is to retain the double stairway with terrazzo floors. Comments:  Will the railing meet ADA requirements on height & extensions?  Is there a way to provide cues/warning surface in the stairway landings for people with low vision? 9) Scent-Free: Pursuant to Committee‟s recommendations, the design team has been investigating materials and floor coverings that will minimize off-gassing of chemicals. The terrazzo floor will be pre-finished as to never require additional waxing. After construction, but prior to opening, the Museum will utilize multiple air exchangers to rid and/or minimize any lingering fumes from the construction. Comment: The Committee wants to re-emphasis the need for public facilities to be aware that fragrances and scents are problematic to many individuals with disabilities. Many current- day Veterans returning from active duty are extremely sensitive to chemicals and fragrances. In addition to construction materials, other items to carefully consider are: A. Selection of cleaning products. B. Recommend not using scent-dispensers in the bathroom. Recommend installation of auto- flush toilet systems and motion sensor for an automatic fan. C. Consider a “scent free” policy for employees. D. Consider promoting “scent-free” events. B. Exterior Spaces 1) Parking Senior Citizen Center Parking Lot (west side) (8 Accessible – 2 are van accessible with a shared access aisle) Comments: 6  Curb ramps with detectable warnings must be installed connecting the sidewalk in front of the Center to all of the parking access aisles. Five aisles are currently shown in the plans. Since the parking access aisles abut a curb/sidewalk, curb ramps connecting the access aisles complying with 4.7 of ADAAG are required. This is required wherever an accessible route (sidewalk) crosses a curb. 4.7 Curb Ramps. 4.7.1 Location. Curb ramps complying with 4.7 shall be provided wherever an accessible route crosses a curb.” “…4.7.7 Detectable Warnings. A curb ramp shall have a detectable warning complying with 4.29.2. The detectable warning shall extend the full width and depth of the curb ramp.” “ Accessible Route. A continuous unobstructed path connecting all accessible elements and spaces of a building or facility. Interior accessible routes may include corridors, floors, ramps, elevators, lifts, and clear floor space at fixtures. Exterior accessible routes may include parking access aisles, curb ramps, crosswalks at vehicular ways, walks, ramps, and lifts.” http://www.ada.gov/pcatoolkit/app1curbramps.htm  Truncated domes (Detectable Warnings [4.7.7]) are located at the edges of curbs to provide a cue to people with vision impairments. Detectable warnings are intended to alert pedestrians of an imminent hazard but are not designed as wayfinding devices. Research indicates that the most effective detectable warning:  has a unique texture distinct from other common surfaces in the environment  adjoins or abuts the hazard to signal impending change  extends beyond the average stride length so that one can detect, understand, and react to it before encountering the hazard Since curb ramps remove this detectable drop-off, ADAAG requires a distinctive dome patterning for the surface of curb ramps detectable by canes or by foot so that people with vision impairments could detect the transition from pedestrian area to street. The Board temporarily suspended the requirements for detectable warnings in 1994 due to concerns raised about the specifications, the availability of complying products, maintenance issues such as snow and ice removal, usefulness, and safety. The departments of Justice (DOJ) 7 and Transportation (DOT), which maintain enforceable standards based on ADAAG, joined the Board in this action. As a result, the requirements for detectable warnings were temporarily removed from the ADA standards. The suspension expired on July 26, 2001. Consequently, the requirements for detectable warnings at curb ramps and other areas are again part of ADAAG and the enforceable standards. For additional information, see section 4.29 and an update on the status of these requirements. Other Items of Note: Curb ramps and truncated domes are also required on the south end of the sidewalk in front of the Senior Citizen Center where the sidewalk ends and accesses the parking lot/alley. Vertical signage is required designating accessible parking spots. The Committee is producing an accessible parking brochure that provides guidance on parking space and signage design. It’s in draft form, but will be included with this report. Vacated 4th Street Lot (500 block) (34 spaces & 4 Accessible) Comments:  Pursuant to the Committee’s previous recommendations, two additional spaces were added on the north side of the street adjacent to the building. No details available on accessible parking space design including curb cuts.  Same curb ramp, access aisle & truncated dome requirements as noted above. Community Cultural Center (Carnegie Library) Comments:  The entire corner will be redone in similar design to the downtown Streetscape project. The proposed plan reviewed today did not show an accessible space. A new compliant space must be installed in the same location with the same curb ramp, access aisle and truncated dome requirements as noted above.  There may be slope/grade issues with the site. Committee recommends the design team review the new “Public Right-of-way Access Advisory Committee – Special Report – Accessible Public Right-Of-Way, Planning & Designing for Alternations” for guidance. A complimentary copy is enclosed with the report. Proposed Seating Area in former Substation Location 2) Path of Travel/Entrance/South Side  All exterior areas in this location appear to have an accessible path of travel with a series of ramps, landings and handrail system to accommodate the six foot slope in grade (southwest corner). Although the ramp slope will not require railings, the design team is developing plans for a railing system in case one is desired in the future.  All spaces will be connected by hard surface accessible path of travel. 8 3) Path of Travel/ History Timeline/Northwest Side  The use of the space has changed considerably from the July 2008 plan review. The exhibit spaces and structures have been moved indoors and the exterior space will be a „nature study‟ and natural prairie setting.  New features will include two tunnels for child play, one of which will accommodate child size wheelchairs for history timeline to include: o The river remains in the plan and pursuant to the Committee‟s recommendations will be zero depth to accommodate wheelchair access. o Bridges o The earlier proposed Dinosaur Dig / depressed area with ramps also remains. Use of elevated activities within this exhibit. An accessible table will be located in this area. o The Shelter/Pavilion and Ice skating pond also remain in the plans  The design team has selected the decomposed limestone as the primary path of travel material. Fiber mulch will also be used in side areas. Comments:  All areas of play activity and buildings must be connected by an accessible path of travel. The Committee recommended the design team install a connecting path of travel to the warming house and ice rink. 4) Neighborhood Park & Playground / North Side The decision was made to retain the existing large playground equipment on the north side for a neighborhood park. Accessible path of travel is provided from the public sidewalk area on 5th Street and from the Museum facility. 5) Buses – Unloading Area The plans do not include a bus shelter. The north side of 4th Street in front of the museum will be designated for bus loading and unloading. Accessible parking and passenger loading zones require aisles alongside parking and pull- up spaces so that persons using mobility aids can transfer and maneuver to and from vehicles. Wider aisles are necessary to accommodate vans equipped with lifts, which are often mounted on the side but sometimes the back. Accessibility also includes the appropriate designation and location of spaces and passenger loading zones, their connection to an accessible route, and vertical clearance for vans. (ADAAG 4.6) Passenger Loading Zones [4.6.6] - Where zones are specifically designed for passenger loading and unloading, at least one on a site must be accessible. Recommendation: In practice however, particularly at large facilities such as airports and university campuses (which may be served by shuttles), it is recommended that passenger loading zones serving all accessible entrances be accessible. Aisles must be at least 5 feet wide, although a wider aisle (8 feet wide minimum) is helpful at zones that serve transit vehicles with lifts or ramps. A level surface (maximum 2% slope in any direction) for both the space and aisle is important for wheelchair transfer to and from vehicles and deployment of vehicle lifts or ramps. Where aisles are flush with 9 the pull-up space, wheelchair transfer is easier (the change in level of aisles at curb height can make transfer very difficult). As discussed in our meeting, we are attaching a copy of the Larson Ice Center exterior plan that is scheduled for completion this year. The Center has incorporated a recessed access aisle in the loading zone area in the same design that is being suggested for the Museum (ENCLOSED). Figure 503.3 Passenger Loading Zone Access Aisle 6) 5th Avenue & 5th Street Sidewalks & Curb Ramps The plan will include new sidewalks and curb ramps along this area. Truncated domes will also be required. C. Programmatic No programmatic documents regarding Museum policy or exhibit design were available at this point in the project design. Comments: The team applauds the overall building design and is hopeful that the educational leadership team will be equally enthusiastic with taking into consideration access for people with disabilities while creating an inclusive experience for museum patrons. The team would be happy to meet with exhibit planners at the appropriate time. An online resource that we’d like to point out is National Endowment for the Arts Office for AccessAbility. http://www.nea.gov/resources/Accessibility/office.html Prepared by Shari Thornes Dated 4/3/09 Enclosures: 1) Accessible Parking Brochure 2) Larson Ice Center / Exterior Plans for Bus Loading Zone 3) “Public Right-of-way Access Advisory Committee – Special Report – Accessible Public Right-Of-Way, Planning & Designing for Alternations” 4) Draft “Accessible Parking Requirements” Brochure, Brookings Committee for People who have Disabilities, 2009 Encl/cc: Suzanne Hegg, Executive Director, South Dakota Children’s Museum Lyle Pudwill, Project Lead Architect, Confluence, Sioux Falls 10 ADA Compliance Review: Bike Trail Expansion Project Dates: March 24, 2009: Received Review Request from City March 27, 2009: Presented plan overview to full Committee @ regular monthly meeting & assigned subcommittee to review April 6, 2009: Subcommittee Plan Review April 17, 2009: Full Committee Review of Report Reviewers: Brookings Committee for People who have Disabilities Members: Dave Miller, Chair; Alan Davis, Dona Kornbaum, and Dave Bertelson Shari Thornes, City ADA Compliance Officer Project Summary: The City of Brookings is planning to extend the existing bike trail an additional 3 ½ miles. Trail Purpose/Definition: The proposed trail project is considered a “shared use trail.” Shared use paths that allow bicycles, pedestrians and other non-pedestrian modes of transportation have their own design and construction guidelines. The primary guide for bicycle and share use facilities is the AASHTO (Reference Document #3 below). This guide has different requirements than those for pedestrian use trail. A trail designed only to meet the proposed accessibility guidelines (Reference Document #2 below) may not be adequate and possibly hazardous for bicyclists. Source/Reference Documents Used in Review: 1) Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines (ADAAG)* 2) U.S. Access Board’s “Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) for Accessibility Guidelines for Outdoor Developed Areas” (2007) ** 3) American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials “AASHTO for Bicycle Facilities” * The ADAAG addresses the built environment and these guidelines don’t transfer well to the natural environment. That is why it’s important to utilize multiple resources for guidance including consulting with people with disabilities. ** An accessible trail is a trail that is accessible to and usable by people with disabilities. Accessible trails are identified as meeting minimum guidelines established by the U. S. Access Board. The Access Board is the federal agency responsible for creating guidelines and standards for accessible environments. In June 2007, the Access Board issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) for Accessibility Guidelines for Outdoor Developed Areas covered under the Architectural Barriers Act. Eventually guidelines will be issued for those entities covered under the Americans with Disabilities Act. During the standard development process, facilities need to use the "best available information." For outdoor environments, the current best available information is the NPRM for Outdoor Developed Areas. The remainder of this technical assistance paper will draw from the NPRM. Key Provisions of Trail Accessibility: The group reviewed the following key issues related to trail accessibility as outlined in the Accessibility Guidelines for Outdoor Developed Areas: 1) Surface 2) Clear Tread Width 3) Openings 11 4) Protruding Object 5) Tread Obstacles 6) Passing Space 7) Slope 8) Resting Intervals 9) Edge Protection 10) Signage 11) Curb Ramps & Detectable Warnings Surface Types: Compliant Required: See specifications below Proposed: Majority of trail – asphalt or concrete, depending on price. Wetlands area will be boardwalk, either treated wood or composite material An accessible trail includes a route from accessible parking to the trailhead. Once on the trailhead, the first issue addressed is surface. The trail surface must be firm and stable. Firmness refers to the penetration of the surface that occurs when force is applied, for example when stepped on. Stability on the other hand, refers to the displacement of the surface when a turning motion is applied to the surface such as the twisting of a foot. In other words, firmness is a vertical measure of penetration and stability involves how much surface material shifts when rotated pressure is applied. Examples of firm and stable surfaces include concrete and asphalt. Soil stabilizers are sometimes used to make otherwise inaccessible surfaces more firm and/ or stable. ****NOTE that “slip resistant” cannot be guaranteed in an outdoor environment. Weather conditions will affect slip resistance. Clear Tread Width: Compliant Required: 36” inches Proposed: Trail is eight (8) feet wide. The clear tread width of an accessible trail must be a minimum of 36 inches. This allows a wide enough area for a person using a wheelchair or scooter to comfortably stay on the firm and stable trail surface. Openings: Compliant Required: ½ inch or less Proposed: ½ inch or less Openings in trail surfaces, such as spaces between the boards of a boardwalk. These spaces may not allow the passage of a sphere one-half inch in diameter. In addition, the long dimension must run perpendicular or diagonal to the main direction of travel preventing casters from wheelchairs, or tips of canes from being caught in the spaces. Protruding Objects Compliant Required: 80” or more clear headroom Proposed: 80” or more clear headroom (no overhead obstacles in plan) Protruding objects are required to allow a minimum of 80 inches clear headroom space above the trail. In other words, any protruding objects, including vegetation, must be above a minimum of eighty inches from the ground. This space prevents people who are blind from bumping their heads on tree branches or other objects hanging above the trail. Simple maintenance of trails is often the solution to preventing accessibility issues resulting from protruding objects. Tread Obstacles Compliant 12 Required: 2” maximum height Proposed: None proposed Examples of tread obstacles include tree roots, rocks, brush, downed trees or branches projecting from the trail. Tread obstacles cannot exceed a maximum height of two inches. An exception occurs if running and cross slopes are 1: 20 or less, then the obstacle may be three inches in height. Passing Space Compliant Required: 60 x 60 inches passing space occurring every 1000 feet Proposed: Path already complies since its 8 feet wide the entire way Passing space allows people who use wheelchairs to pass other hikers easily. Passing spaces need to be a minimum of 60 X 60 inches and occur at 1,000 feet intervals when the clear tread width of the trail is less than 60 inches. An alternative is a T-shaped space providing the arms and stem extend at least 48 inches beyond the intersection. The T-shape still needs to occur every 1,000 feet, whenever possible, the 60 X 60 space should be utilized to offer a more convenient way for people to pass one another. Slope SEE NOTE Required: See below Proposed: 5% or less NOTE: One area of the plan currently cites a 5.77% slope; however, plan designers indicated this would be corrected in the final plans. This provision addresses two slopes that are crucial elements to people with mobility impairments— running slope and cross slope. With the exception for drainage, the cross slope of an accessible trail should be less than 1: 20. In addition, running slopes must comply with one or more of four provisions with no more than 30 percent of the total trail length exceeding 1: 12. - Running slope cannot exceed 1: 20 (5%) for any distance. - If resting intervals are provided every 200 feet, the running slope may be a maximum of 1: 12. - If resting intervals are provided every 30 feet, the running slope may be a maximum of 1: 10. - If resting intervals are provided every 10 feet, the running slope may be a maximum of 1: 8. Resting Intervals Required: 60 inches minimum in length with slope of 5% or less Proposed: No resting areas or benches are planned with the scope of this project; however, City may add at a later date. Resting intervals must be 60 inches minimum in length, and have a width as wide as the widest portion of the trail segment leading to the resting interval. The slope may not exceed 1: 20 in any direction. Edge Protection SEE NOTE Required: If provided, minimum of 3 inches high Proposed: Hard surface path – no edge protection NOTE: Boardwalk area will have 2” x 6” edger with hand rails. 13 Guidelines state edge protection is not necessarily required, however where it is provided, it must have a minimum height of 3 inches. Signage SEE NOTE Recommended: See Below Proposed: NOTE: No signage other than signs at the crossings is planned at this time. Recommend city consider installation of signage as described below. Accessible trails should include signage with information on the total distance of the accessible segment and the location of the first point of departure from the technical provisions. Although no specific symbol has been chosen to represent an accessible trail one of the four examples displayed here may be utilized. Examples of signs that could be used to designate trails that fully comply with the accessibility guidelines. Curb Ramps/Detectable Warnings Required: See details below Proposed: The trail will cross intersections along LeFevre Drive, 32nd Avenue and SD Highway 14. The plan calls for the installation of curb ramps and detectable warnings in all areas were the path enters a street. 14 Curb Ramps [4.7]: Curb ramps complying with 4.7 are required wherever an accessible route crosses a curb. Slope [4.7.2]: The running slope of curb ramps cannot exceed 1:12. In alterations where it is technically infeasible to meet new construction requirements, curb ramps may have a maximum slope of 1:10 if the rise does not exceed 6 inches. It is important that transitions to curb ramps be flush. Lips at the bottom of ramps, a common complaint, impede the momentum needed to propel a wheelchair up-slope. Severe counter slopes can do the same thing and cause footrests to scrape. Recommendation: While a 5% adjoining slope is allowed for drainage, gutters, and roadway crowns, this slope should be minimized wherever possible (a maximum 2% slope is preferred). Width [4.7.3] and Surface [4.7.4]: The minimum clear width of a curb ramp is 36 inches, exclusive of flared sides. Curb ramp surfaces, including flared sides, must comply with requirements in 4.5 for ground and floor surfaces be "stable, firm, and slip resistant." The cross-slope of the curb ramp (2% maximum) must be minimized because it makes wheelchair travel difficult by distributing weight and required force to one side and causing front casters to veer. Sides of Curb Ramps [4.7.5]: Where pedestrians cross the ramp, curb cuts are required to have side flares; sharp returns present tripping hazards. Returned curbs are acceptable where pedestrian traffic across the ramp is discouraged. Built-up Curb Ramps [4.7.6]: Built-up curb ramps are permitted where they do not project into vehicular traffic lanes or access aisles at parking spaces and passenger loading zones. (The surface of access aisles cannot slope more than 2% in any direction). Recommendation: Curb ramps with returned sides or concave flares are preferred over built-up curb ramps with convex flares because they provide greater edge protection. Detectable Warnings [4.7.7]: The edges of curbs can provide a cue to people with vision impairments. Since curb ramps remove this detectable drop-off, ADAAG requires a distinctive dome patterning for the surface of curb ramps detectable by canes or by foot so that people with vision impairments could detect the transition from pedestrian area to street. The Board temporarily suspended the requirements for detectable warnings in 1994 due to concerns raised about the specifications, the availability of complying products, maintenance issues such as snow and ice removal, usefulness, and safety. The departments of Justice (DOJ) and Transportation (DOT), which maintain enforceable standards based on ADAAG, joined the Board in this action. As a result, the requirements for detectable warnings were temporarily removed from the ADA standards. The suspension expired on July 26, 2001. Consequently, the requirements for detectable warnings at curb ramps and other areas are again part of ADAAG and the enforceable standards. For additional information, see section 4.29 and an update on the status of these requirements. Obstructions [4.7.8]: It is important that parked cars, lampposts, utility poles, and other elements placed along sidewalks not obstruct connecting accessible routes. Space is needed at the top and bottom of ramps so that people using wheelchairs can align with the running slope and maneuver from ramps, including when making turns (which is difficult on sloped surfaces). At curb ramps, a landing provides the necessary connection to an accessible route. A landing with a minimum length of 48 inches will provide sufficient turning space. Where space at the top is less than 48 inches, side flares must have a maximum slope of 1:12 instead of 1:10 at the curb face. 15 Location at Marked Crossings [4.7.9]: The foot of a curb ramp must be contained within the crosswalk, where one is marked. At corners with a large radius, perpendicular curb ramps should be located so that the centerline is radial to the curb face instead of being in line with the crosswalk direction. Diagonal Curb Ramps [4.7.10]: People using wheelchairs should not be directed into an active travel lane in order to cross stopped traffic. A landing at least 48 inches long must be provided outside the through-travel lanes if a diagonal ramp is used. Otherwise, perpendicular curb ramps should be used. In addition, a segment of straight curb at least 2 feet long must be provided on each side of the curb ramp and within the marked crossing. Islands [4.7.11]: At traffic islands, wheelchair space between opposing ramps is essential. If there is no level space between ramps, wheelchairs can "bottom out" or "high center" while proceeding down one ramp while the back wheels are coming up the other slope. Cut-through routes level with the street are necessary where wheelchair space between opposing ramps is not available. Islands with cut-through routes must be wide enough (48 inches minimum) to provide space for a person using a wheelchair. Detectable Warnings [4.29]: People with little or no usable vision use environmental cues for safe and independent travel. These cues may include ambient sounds, edges and other physical elements that can be sensed by using a cane, and texture changes underfoot. Curbs are an important cue. Where curbs are lacking, such as at curb ramps, vehicle drop-offs, and depressed corners at intersections, people with vision impairments may not be able to discern the boundary between pedestrian and vehicular areas. Detectable warnings, a distinctive surface pattern of domes detectable by cane or underfoot, are used to alert people with vision impairments of their approach to streets and hazardous drop-offs. ADAAG requires these warnings on the surface of curb ramps, and at other areas where pedestrian ways blend with vehicular ways. They are also required along the edges of boarding platforms in transit facilities and at the edges of reflecting pools not protected by railings, walls, or curbs. Suspension of Requirements (1994 - 2001): The Board temporarily suspended the requirements for detectable warnings in 1994 due to concerns raised about the specifications, the availability of complying products, maintenance issues such as snow and ice removal, usefulness, and safety. This suspension applied to all requirements for detectable warnings except those at boarding platforms in transit stations. The departments of Justice (DOJ) and Transportation (DOT), which maintain enforceable standards based on ADAAG, joined the Board in this action. As a result, the requirements for detectable warnings were temporarily removed from the ADA standards. The suspension expired on July 26, 2001. Consequently, the requirements for detectable warnings at curb ramps and other areas are again part of ADAAG and the enforceable standards. For additional information, see the Board's update on the status of these requirements. http://www.access-board.gov/adaag/dws/update.htm Detectable Warnings on Walking Surfaces [4.29.2] and Curb Ramps [4.7.7]: Detectable warnings are intended to alert pedestrians of an imminent hazard but are not designed as wayfinding devices. Research indicates that the most effective detectable warning: has a unique texture distinct from other common surfaces in the environment adjoins or abuts the hazard to signal impending change extends beyond the average stride length so that one can detect, understand, and react to it before encountering the hazard 16 The truncated dome specification and intended offset pattern was found to be the most effective in providing a distinct patterning detectable by cane and underfoot. The degree of truncation, which is not specified, varies according to the manufacturer. Accessible Parking No additional accessible parking is planned with this project. Final Plan Review. It was noted during the review of the project, that the plans are not completed. Pursuant to the City of Brookings Policy on ADA Compliance Review, ADA compliance officer will review the project scope, final plans, and bid package of all new construction, remodels, and retrofits of City- owned facilities and parks. The scope and budget development of capital improvement projects will include the identification of ADA needs related to these projects to ensure compliance and accessibility standards. A full copy of the policy is included as an addendum. Why Accessibility? There are more than 53 million Americans with disabilities in the United States. This translates to one in five individuals having some type of functional limitation that substantially limits one or more major life activities. Recreation opportunities give people with disabilities and people without disabilities the opportunity to enjoy life, benefit from the experience and contribute to their own sense of health and wellness. Ensuring recreation opportunities are accessible, such as trails, can create more opportunities for people with disabilities to participate with their families and friends. There is also a business aspect to providing programs and facilities that are accessible to people with disabilities. Accessible facilities and programs can increase the number of prospective visitors, their family members and friends, thus increasing participation and added revenue. Shari Thornes, Brookings City ADA Compliance Officer Dated April 13, 2009 Copies provided to: Jeffrey Weldon, City Manager Allyn Frerichs, Park, Recreation & Forestry Superintendent The ultimate goal is to provide trail access for all to nature's wonders while protecting the environment through which these new trails pass. -Peter Jensen, Trail Designer Open Space Management and Member of the Regulatory Negotiating Committee