HomeMy WebLinkAboutDisMinutes_2010_08_27Brookings Committee for People who have Disabilities
August 27, 2010
A meeting of the Brookings Committee for People who have Disabilities was held at 2:00 p.m. on
Friday, August 27, 2010 in the Brookings City Hall with the following members present: Kathy
Heylens, Nancy Hartenhoff-Crooks, Jeff Vostad, Dave Miller, Kim Lindell, Dave Bertelson, Dona
Kornbaum, Lonnie Bayer, Alan Davis and Jessie Kuechenmeister. Absent: Kurt Cogswell. Shari
Thornes was also present
Miller called the meeting to order at 2:00 p.m. Discussion regarding the NDEAM event was
added to the agenda under the Governor’s Award discussion. The August minutes were
approved. Next meeting – October 22nd @ 2:00 p.m.
NEW BUSINESS:
CITY CITY/COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE BUILDING PLAN REVIEW. The Committee had its first initial
review of the City/County administrative building preliminary site plans dated August 11, 2010 and
provided the following comments:
1. Accessible Parking Location(s): The proposed design has primary entrances on the north
and west sides. Parking is provided at both locations with diagonal parking on Third Street
and the primary parking lot to the west. Accessible parking spaces are included adjacent to
both entrances. If the building has multiple accessible entrances with adjacent parking,
ADAAG strongly advises there be accessible parking spaces provided in all areas located
on the shortest accessible route of travel to the parking facility's accessible pedestrian
entrance(s).
Concern was expressed regarding diagonal parking on Third Street because drivers would
back into traffic. Although the posted speed limit is 25 mph, there was a concern that
vehicles travel at a higher rate of speed in that area as compared to downtown. The
Committee asked if the Traffic Safety Committee would be reviewing the Third Street
parking.
NOTE: If parallel street parking is provided instead of diagonal, accessible spaces should
still be provided.
2. Accessible Parking Space Design. Not enough detail is available to evaluate the space,
access aisle and curb ramp design.
3. Accessible Route and Connection of Spaces. There was concern regarding the elevators
being located in the center of the building rather than near either entrance. Related to
that concern was the fact that the Council Chambers and Community Room would be
located on the Third Floor. Their first recommendation would be to locate the
Chambers on the first floor in the closest proximity possible to primary entrance with
accessible parking. If that can’t be achieved, the next best option would be to locate an
elevator immediately inside a primary entrance and the Third Floor “Chamber” entrance
be located near that same elevator.
4. Interior Ramp on First Floor. More information was requested regarding the interior
ramp in the County Finance Office.
5. Accessible Counters. The design of public work, service and payment counters in all city
and county offices will need careful review. The Committee noted that many of the
current County office counters are inaccessible.
6. Connection to South Parking Lot. There is one planed curb ramp at the southwest corner
of the parking lot that appears to just dump people out onto Second Street. Will a
striped crosswalk be installed connecting to th is parking lot and sidewalk?
7. Council DAIS on Third Floor. The elevated Council dais is accessed by steps from the
public area and a ramp from a rear private entrance. The current design may provide
physical access to the space; however, it would make “programs, services and activities”
inaccessible. With the current design the only way to access the council chambers during
a meeting is by using steps. There are occasions when a council member or committee
member would need to participate in a presentation or ceremony or may simply want to
greet someone during a break. This current design would prevent equal participation by
all council members.
Jeff Weldon, City Manager, joined the meeting to answer questions. He said the plan is to have
the site cleared by November 1, 2010 and work would continue until weather prevents.
Footings and foundation are planned for spring 2011. He anticipates a 12 -14 month
construction period, with final completion summer 2012.
The City/County Joint Powers Board is hosting a public open house to unveil the proposed
exterior elevations on Wednesday, September 1st, at 7:00 p.m. in the 1921 Building. In addition
to ADA review, the historic preservation review of the proposed design will commence and
continue over this winter.
BROOKINGS SCHOOL DISTRICT PARKING LOT REVIEW. Bayer was contacted by School District
representatives to look at accessible parking in Medary’s east lot. Bayer had previously
contacted the School regarding the lack of van spaces and signage. The School asked if he
could look at the lot again because the contractor was coming the next day to restripe. Due to
the urgency of the request, Bayer was unable to coordinate with others.
In addition to this lot, the School District has asked the Committee survey all their parking lots.
Thornes asked who the School has appointed as its current ADA Coordinator . She noted that
the parking lot survey is the responsibility of the School’s ADA coordinator.
SUBCOMMITTEE: Miller, Kornbaum, Bayer and Thornes will conduct the review. Survey tools
needed include the ADAAG Survey Form #1-Parking, ADA Business Brief: Restriping Parking Lots
and United States Access Board Technical Bulletin on Parking. The subcommittee will try to
complete the survey by mid September with a report at the next meeting.
UNIVERSITY MALL / SD ADVOCACY VISIT. On August 10th, Thornes was contacted by Valorie
Ahrendt, South Dakota Advocacy Services representative, regarding a complaint filed by
Brookings citizen Thomas Barthalow. Mr. Barthalow asked for SD Advocacy to review a number
of parking areas throughout Brookings. Ahrendt said she agreed to look at the University Mall
lot and scheduled the review for August 13th. She contacted Thornes prior to the review as a
courtesy and indicated she would follow-up with a report the next week.
In an email to Thornes dated 8/23, Ahrendt said she did agree with Mr. Barthalow on many
points, noting there are obstacles that anyone with a wheelchair is faced with if they want to
shop at the mall and participate in front of Lewis Drug. She asked if the Committee would be
willing to do an assessment of the University Mall lot and give the ir recommendations to the
owner, otherwise SD Advocacy would take it on. She noted tha t their organization tries to solve
the issues at the lowest level possible or turn it over to an organization/group/committee/etc.
who is involved in that area of work.
In an email to Thornes dated 8/26, Ahrendt noted the following items in the University Mall
parking lot:
Particularly in front of Lewis:
Placing the access lane in front (or back depending on which way you look at it) of the big
square (electrical box maybe?) forces the individual to go into traffic to get to the front door
of Lewis.
There are no cement blocks to prevent a car or van from pulling ahead onto the sidewalk
which could prevent a wheelchair from using the sidewalk to the front door. Again forcing
the individual into traffic.
Van access lanes are not wide enough (only 4 ft.).
The day she was there, Lewis had so much merchandise out in front that a person could not
take the shortest route from the accessible parking but rather had to maneuver the
obstacles to get to the front door.
Lewis Pharmacy drive up window is so low that a driver in a larger van could not use it. Not
sure if this falls under ADA.
Throughout the whole mall parking lot:
Not enough or non-existent signage
No access lanes
No crosswalk lanes by accessible parking
SUBCOMMITTEE: Vostad, Miller, Bayer and Thornes will conduct an accessibility review of the
University Mall parking lot. The group will provide a report at the September 17 th Committee
meeting. Thornes will contact Ahrendt regarding the Committee’s intentions.
South Dakota Advocacy Services is South Dakota's designated Protection and Advocacy (P&A)
System. Federal law provides that each state have a system for protecting the rights of persons
with disabilities. South Dakota Advocacy Services (SDAS) is the independent, private, non-profit,
tax exempt corporation designated by the Governor to assist in providing protection and
advocacy services to eligible South Dakotans.
PROJECT & ISSUE UPDATES:
MCCRORY GARDENS VISITOR CENTER PLAN REVIEW. Amy Jones, SDSU Architect, was scheduled
to attend this meeting to respond to Committee questions. Thornes will email her the comments
and schedule a subcommittee review. Thornes noted that another set of plan revisions is expected
by August 29th.
The Committee submitted the following list of questions and comments after the first plan review.
Jones emailed the following responses. Also included below are staff and DBTAC comments
related to the responses.
1) Additional dimension details are need for the loading zone design.
SDSU’s response: This should be on the final plans. The general public won’t be
accessing this space. Is there anything specific you are reviewing with regard to
public use?
Committee Discussion – Where will school buses, BATA and paratransit unload?
2) Clarification is requested on the accessible parking space design regarding all dimensions.
SDSU’s response: The dimensions are on the plan sheet L2.2. The Architect is
checking for any design issues. Would you clarify if you need more information?
3) Only one van accessible space is provided. Consider replacing 5’ aisle with second 8’ van
access aisle.
SDSU’s Response: Will review.
4) Are wheel stops planned in front of the accessible spaces?
SDSU’s Response. No.
Rob Gilkerson - DTBAC’s Response: It’s great that the sidewalk in front of the
accessible spaces is the same level as the accessible parking spaces & access
aisles; however, vehicles could easily pull to far forward and accidently block the
sidewalk with the front of their vehicles. Therefore, I would encourage the
placement of wheel stops at this location.
5) Total number of parking spaces in plan?
SDSU’s Response: 92 as shown on L2.1
6) Curb Ramp – Type A, B, & C: Detectable warnings will need to be the full width of the
ramp – not just 2’ by 4’; therefore, the drawings probably should say 2’ by varies width of
ramp.
SDSU’s Response: Detectable warning panels will be changed to be the full width
of the walk. Please help by noting what guideline or standard this complies with.
Rob Gilkerson – DBTAC’s Response: ADA Standards: “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.”
7) Curb Ramp – Type B - As drawn the curb taper/curb ramp flares are a steep 1:4 – they
should be no more than 1:10.
o SDSU’s Response: The Architect checked this and notes that 1:10 should be the
max in all directions of the curb ramp. I must be overlooking where 1:4 is noted.
Let us know where you are seeing that so we make sure it gets changed.
o Rob Gilkerson – DBTAC’s Response: You are correct, 1:4 wasn’t specifically noted;
however, a 6 inch rise within two feet is 1:4 slope. Therefore, the area available
for the curb taper for a 6 inch high curb should be 6 foot wide on each side of the
ramp.
8) Concrete Steps: As drawn the handrail is 36” high and does not return to the ground or
post; therefore, it wouldn’t be cane detectable.
o SDSU’s Response: The Architect will check this; he believe there is a post there for
cane detection, but will look again and coordinate if it isn’t shown.
o Rob Gilkerson – DBTAC’s Response: Attached two drawings that show two
different ways to make handrails at steps or ramps Cain detectable. Note, the
bottom portion of the hand rail in the first drawing should be no higher than 27
inches to make it Cain detectable.
9) Accessible design should not only be fun ctional, but should provide everyone with the
same welcoming experience. The main path of travel from the building’s three double
doors on the south façade open to three steps spanning 31.5’, offset with pillars, with
the main path of travel culminating with a water feature at the bottom of the center of
three green areas. Another smaller set of steps provides access to the west. The
accessible path of travel winds behind and to the west, entering the farthest west end of
the event field.
The Committee strongly urges the primary entrance into the south event fields be
redesigned from step design to a gradual, sloping ramp. The current design of grand
steps from the main south exit unto the event grounds, do not provide a welcoming
environment for people with disabilities. It appears from the elevations that the event
field had to be lowered to provide for the steps. We feel the new design would provide
the same functionality and better access.
“Universal design – the design of products and environments to be usable by all people,
to the greatest extent possible, without the need for adaptation or specialized design.”
SDSU’s Response: There is a second path that does not use stairs. It’s just to the
east.
10) Request clarification of second floor use and recommend installation of a service
elevator in first floor storage room to provide accessible use of second floor for all
university employees.
SDSU’s Response: Second floor is for long term storage of garden records.
11) Family restroom design – recommend eliminating one of the doors (farthest east) and
relocate the changing table. What is the 2’6” space behind the sink?
SDSU’s Response: We have a revised layout eliminating the second door. Will get
that to you as soon as it’s complete.
12) A percentage of any exterior tables must meet ADA requirements.
SDSU’s Response: Acknowledge.
13) Door schedule details requested to provide clarification on door widt h in bathroom
hallway.
SDSU’s Response: The schedule shows a 3ft wide opening. I included the door
schedule with the most recent set of plans so you can do comprehensive review.
WEBSITE. The City is currently redesigning its website. The goal is to create a new website that is
user-friendly, accessible, timely, personal, engaging and functional. Each department has been
asked to review existing content and submit new material this fall. Members were asked to review
the current website content, look at other cities for new ideas and propose content ideas at the
September meeting.
SUMMER ARTS FESTIVAL PARKING. Miller experienced problems with the accessible parking
during both days of the Festival. He found inappropriate use and monitoring the accessible
spaces located in the east lot on 1st Avenue. The Committee will seek to work with the Summer
Arts Festival to develop a new accessibility plan for the 2011 Festival.
NATIONAL DISABILITY EMPLOYMENT AWARENESS MONTH (NDEAM). Hartenhoff-Crooks spoke
on behalf of the NDEAM group to ask if the Governor’s Awards nominee announcement could be
done at an October City Council meeting. She also noted that there might have been a change in
the award categories.
This year’s NDEAM celebration event will feature keynote speaker John Robinson, “Get Off Your
Knees – a story of faith, courage and determination,” on Wednesday, October 6th, at the Day’s Inn.
The event is cosponsored by NDEAM, Career Advantage, Vocation Rehab, Dept of Human Services
and the Committee.
COMMITTEE REPORTS:
TRANSPORTATION BOARD REPORT. Hartenhoff-Crooks said she was unable to attend the last
board meeting; however, she did learn the group reviewed the 2011 transportation related city
funding requests from the Brookings Taxi Service, BATA and the Volunteer Service Bank and made
recommendations to the City Council.
CITY ADA COORDINATOR’S REPORT.
NATURE PARK. The City Council approved the Nature Park Master Plan at its August 24th meeting.
Thornes noted this project will, more than likely, be done in phases. Therefore, the Committee will
need to monitor program accessibility throughout all the phases to ensure equal access to the
Park’s programs, services and activities.
Thornes also noted that a council member asked how much of the new trails would be paved,
noting they were hoping for some trails to be natural and softer (unpaved). Thornes said John
Royster, landscape architect for the project, responded by pointing out that each area of different
programming needed an accessible path of travel.
SIDEWALK LETTERS. The City Engineering Department has sent letters to property owners
throughout the community regarding installing new sidewalk, where there currently is no
sidewalk. They haven’t mapped the missing sidewalk locations, but the general areas are as
follows: 12th Street South near Middle School (shamrock, south side of 12th St S), Esther Heights
(a lot of them in this development), Western Avenue south of 8 th Street South, along the east
side of 22nd Avenue adjacent to Walmart and Perkins, West side 22 nd Avenue along Moriarty
Addition (two homes built that need sidewalk), North side of Orchard Drive, near Cases (Lance
Park lot), and Vacant lots on the West side of Main Avenue near 3 rd Street South (north of vet
office).
The Committee is asked to help identify other missing areas and will be provided with the list
prior to the next meeting.
FRONT STREET. The City is redesigning Front Street between the Park and Recreation building
and the former depot for railroad safety mitigation reasons. The Committee will be asked to
provide comment on the final plans. Thornes anticipates yet this fall.
LIBRARY PARKING. Thornes will be reviewing the library parking lot for accessibility. No cha nges
are planned for the area that would require modifications; however, with all the new
construction, it would be a good idea to consider improvements now.
DOWNTOWN PARKING REQUEST. Tom Anderson, downtown business owner, has contacted the
city engineer about installing an accessible parking space in front of his building at on 4th Street
next to Wink’s Jewelry.
The Committee reviewed this request last year and made the following recommendation:
On August 21, 2009, the Brookings Committee for People who have Disabilities met and reviewed Mr. Tom
Anderson’s request for an accessible parking space at 316 5th Street. They recommended that an accessible
standard or van parking space only be added if there was sufficient room to meet ADA requiremen ts by restriping.
This would include the 8’ space, 5 or 8’ access aisle the entire 20’ length of the space, curb ramp from access aisle
to sidewalk, detectable warning from sidewalk to aisle, and accurate vertical signage (van or standard)). The alley
cannot be used as the access aisle. Note that the sidewalk near Mr. Anderson’s business is in poor condition with
several tripping hazards. This needs to be repaired regardless if the parking space is installed or not.
As for the space in front of TV Productions, the other business owners in that block should be consulted before it is
removed. Even though TV Productions no longer sees a need for it, Steen Bookkeeping or NWPS may still want it.
It should also be brought into compliance whenever work is done on that sidewalk or street.
The Committee and I are concerned about the appropriate use of detectable warnings. The truncated
domes/detectable warnings are used by 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. Therefore, accurate
placement of detectable warnings is critical. Incorrect placement is almost worse than no warnings at all. For
example, if there is a panel installed cueing the person with a visual impairment they are leaving the sidewalk and
entering the alley, then there needs to be another detectable warning cueing that person they have left the alley and
entered the sidewalk again.
CORRESPONDENCE/ANNOUNCEMENTS/CALENDAR
Monthly Reports
Sept 2nd - Webinar: “The New ADA: Overview of the Top Ten Issues and Key Policy and
Implementation Triggers”
Sept 16th – Webinar: “The New ADA: Overview of the Playgrounds and Golf Requirements”
Sept 23rd – City Volunteer Appreciation Luncheon, Swiftel Center
Sept 30th – Webinar: “The New ADA: Overview of the Requirements for Fitness Facilities,
Aquatics Facilities, and Boating and Fishing Areas”
Nov. 3rd – Three Cups of Tea Author Greg Mortenson speaking at Frost Arena
Dec. 9th – Mayor’s Christmas Party, Brookings Children’s Museum, 5-7 pm
Meeting adjourned at 4:05 p.m.
Submitted by Shari Thornes
Disability Meeting
August 27th List
1. City/County Plan Review Notes
2. School District Parking Survey Meeting (Dave, Dona, Lonnie)
3. University Mall (Dave, Lonnie, Jeff)
4. McCrory Gardens (Dave, Jeff, Nancy, Jessie, Kurt)
5. Arts Festival – accessibility plan
6. Website content
7. Governor’s Awards
- press release
- presentation
- proclamations
- deadlines
- website
8. Nature Park – status
9. Sidewalk Letters
- map
- list
10. Front Street Status
11. John Robinson event
12. Library Parking
13. Tom Anderson