Loading...
04-15-1998 ADA Advisory Board Meeting Minutes April 15, 1998 Board Members Present: Larry Sharp, Ramon Armendariz, Tomas Mendez, Dorothy Powers, Ceasar Rodriguez, Kathe Stark Board Members Absent: Bob Evans, Jennifer Switzer-Hensley Others Present: Steve Trowbridge, Linda McClintock, Leroy and Jean Lozier, Elsa Altshool, John Weeks, Margaret Markham, Bill Kent,Norma, Kent, Tom Fisher, RW Lossow. The meeting was called to order at 10:05 by Co-Chair, Larry Sharp. Motion: To approve the March Meeting minutes was made by Dorothy Powers, seconded by Ramon Armendariz. No further discussion heard. Motion passed unanimously. New Business: Larry Sharp called for New Business: R.W. Lossow asked the Board what can be done with state offices which are not in compliance, naming DMV, Social Security as examples where the entrance and restrooms are not accessible. He also reported on accessibility problems at the District Court Building. R.W. was advised by Tom Fisher to contact the appropriate public entity -the State and to seek assistance from others within the community who are impacted by the lack of accessibility. Kathe explained the enforcement mechanisms and the adoption of UBC and ANSI-117.1 by the State and not the ADAAG Guidelines for accessible buildings. The City has no authority of enforcement for existing federal, state or private buildings unless a permit for alterations or new construction is in place. Issues relating to existing buildings can be addressed with the building owner or through the process in place with the Department of Justice. Margaret Markham asked whether the original drawings had accessibility features in them that someone then took out and stated there is a need for a concentrated effort with architects to inform them of the requirements for compliance. Tomas Mendez explained the obligation of architects to comply with the accessibility requirements; the ADA cases which are working their way to the Supreme Court on the issue of architect's liability; and the fact that much construction work is completed without the services of an architect. He explained the form used by both the City and State to inform contractors of their requirements to meet the requirements of ADAAG, ANSI 117.1 and other buildings codes within the State. Tomas also reported that the local chapter of the American Institute of Architects is interested in working to present accessibility training later this year and that the City's ADA Coordinator and he had been discussing City involvement in this training effort. The ADA Coordinator and Tomas will be presenting this idea to the chapter in May or June. R.W. Lassow asked what is the required slope on ramps. Tomas responded a 1:12 ratio is required and explained what that means in lay terms to clarify the ensuing confusion. RW Lossow stated the ramp at the Municipal Court House that the ramp is too steep. It was later clarified that the ramp in question is at the District Courthouse, not the Municipal Court House. Kathe again reminded participants that this is a county issue. Margaret Markham expressed that good common sense about the needs of the disabled be exercised and that lack of access is a disgrace to the City of Las Cruces. Ramon expressed that, in the past, accessibility has been an after thought and that persons with disabilities were not included in the Civil Rights Legislation of 1964. As a result of ADA, state, local and federal government, while behind, are all trying to bring facilities into compliance. It is important to recognize that before this legislation, we built stairs instead of ramps and that considerable resources will be needed to undue past practices. The ADA Advisory Board exists to advise the City and he would like to hear specific issues within City operations be brought to the Board for consideration. Larry encouraged the community to become involved with the Advisory Board and report any specific issues which the Board can then consider and make recommendations to the City. Leroy Lozier asked what was the deadline for having made ADA improvements and why the County Building at 200 West Amador was not in compliance and no improvements had been made. Kathe reported the law contains numerous deadlines and obligations which are on-going. The initial question was clarified to focus on structural changes to buildings. Kathe explained that access to programs is the critical element and that any structural changes necessary to achieve that end were to have been completed by January 26, 1995. This does not mean that all structural changes to reach optimal accessibility were to have been completed by that time. The final regulations for state and local government were issued in March of this year. Kathe reported that if members of the disabled community had issues regarding program/building access with the County,they would carry those issues to County personnel, not City personnel nor the Advisory Board. An unnamed participant asked how many City buildings do not comply. Tomas responded that City buildings are in various degrees of compliance. Kathe reported on the building surveys and Transition Plan, which is available for public review and comment at the Library, City Clerk's Office and in the ADA Office. Margaret Markham asked how many City buildings were accessible. The question was clarified to: How many City buildings have accessible parking, entrances and restrooms. Kathe directed participants to the Transition Plan for current status of City buildings and reported that access was now provided at the Library, Branigan Cultural Center, Municipal Court Building and Court Youth Center. Further comment would require review of the Transition Plan. Kathe restated the goal of program access. Larry reported that NMSU did their facility surveys and the estimated cost to bring every facility into full compliance would be 35 million and they are working on that objective. He also pointed out that full compliance is a goal which will probably never be achieved. Kathe expanded by reporting accessibility is an on-going process and as new programs are added or new locations used, review of accessibility is always required. Presentation by Robert Garza, Chief Engineer on the accessibility work involving sidewalks: Where we have been, what we have completed, what is currently being bid or constructed and where we are going. A copy of the overheads from this presentation are included with these minutes. Tom Fisher noted that the one overhead slide illustrated an important point and problem: a garbage can sitting in the middle of the sidewalk obstructing accessibility. Tomas responded that a notice was sent to all homeowners alerting them to the fact that trash containers should not be placed on the sidewalks for everyone's benefit. Another participant (unknown)reported that the Solid Waste drivers empty containers, which may not have been placed in the sidewalk, and often place them in the middle of the sidewalk and could place them in another place to maintain accessibility. Kathe will discuss this issue with the Solid Waste Department. Presentation by David Casillas, Budget Office on the City's budget process and the opportunity to participate in public hearings. On 4/29/98 from 5:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. a public hearing will be held in the Council Chambers at City Hall on capital improvements projects. On 4/20/98 the City Council work session agenda will include consideration of the potential bond issue to improve flood control and streets, which would include ADA improvements within those areas. Larry inquired as to how ADA needs are addressed in the budget process. David explained the various city funds, including: General Fund General Fund Capital Fund The Street Maintenance Fund CDBG has been used previously for some sidewalk improvements. Kathe also explained that ADA efforts are included in operating budgets for items such as accommodations, furniture, personal computers and TTY's. RW Lossow asked what percentage of all City funds were being used for ADA. David Casillas reported approximately 2%. RW stated the City should complete a survey to determine the percentage of disabled residents and, for example, if that percentage was 15%then allocate 15% of all resources to ADA efforts. Margaret Markham stated that was not the way expenditures should be looked at. That 2% of City funding would include Police and Fire, as well as other service expenses. It is not appropriate to compare a percentage of ADA expenditures to the total City funds available. Robert Garza reported at 15-18% of street maintenance funds were being used for ADA improvements. John Weeks asked why David Casillas had talked about the bond issue using the phrase "if the bond issue proceeds." David explained that any bond issue requires Council approval and ultimately the approval of residents within the City. If either do not approve the bond issue, it cannot proceed. Tom Fisher asked if between 92-94 any CDBG monies allocated to access issues were diverted and used for other purposes. Both David Casillas and Tomas were not aware of any such actions. Margaret Markham asked when the City Managers budget recommendations would be completed. David responded that the City Managers budget recommendations will be completed at the end of this month and that copies will be available in the Library and City Clerk's office for review in advance of the public meeting. Margaret Markham asked when the total budget recommendations of the City Manager would go to the City Council. David responded no specific date has been established at this point but a public hearing on the City's budget is anticipated in early May. Tomas stated that if the Board and/or community wants to have input on ADA budgeting, they can participate in the public hearing at that time. Agenda Setting: The Board discussed City staff they would like to have attend the next meeting. They include: Gerard Nevarez, EEO/Training Office and Don Brooks, Human Resources Director. Kathe will extend these inviations. Ceasar asked if the Mayor had been invited to a Board meeting. Kathe responded that invitation had not yet been forwarded and she will follow-up to extend that invitation. Kathe asked to Board to include developing sidewalk priorities as part of the May meeting. The goal is to learn where people live, where they are traveling to and what obstacles exist along that path of travel. The Board agreed to spend time in May addressing this issue. Recommendations will then be forwarded to the Development Services Division. Margaret Markham applauded the Board and the activities of the ADA Coordinator, stating the City is light years ahead of the County with recent activities and the existence of an ADA Coordinator. Tomas thanked the community members for their attendance and participation in the meeting. RW Lossow asked if the City used incarcerated individuals to complete improvements? Robert Garza reported the City does use inmates to median clean-up, however, it is important to understand there are many restrictions on the use of inmates and the areas in which they can work. Robert reported labor is not the high cost item on ADA improvements as some may assume. Materials constitute the highest cost. Kathe announced that the Mayor and City Council has approved Ceasar's formal addition to the ADA Advisory Board on April 6, 1998 and thanked him for his on-going participation and future participation. Ramon made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 11:50 a.m. Seconded by Tomas Mendez. Meeting adjourned. Respectfully submitted, Kathe Stark, M.S. ADA Coordinator NEXT MEETING: Wednesday, May 20, 1998 Location: Branigan Library 2nd Floor Pearl Higgens Room Time: 10:00 p.m. - 12:00 p.m. If you need an accommodation to fully participate in and benefit from this meeting, please call Kathe Stark at 528-3401N or 528-3402/TTY 48 hours in advance. Current Activities City of Las Cruces Currently Budgeted Projects DSD /Engineering Department 278 Curb Ramps will be installed on 14 City projects. 16 Miles of sidewalk will be installed. WTV Engineering Department Efforts Lai Engineering Department Efforts Include Design and Construction of Since the adoption of the ADA, City Curb Ramps Projects have been designed and constructed in accordance with the Drivepad Cross Slopes !Transitions ADA. Pedestrian Walkways Remo -al of Obstructions from Sidewalks Curb Ramps Pedestrian Walkways 825 Ramps built on City Streets Since 1992 85 Miles of Pedestrian Walkways have been installed in City R-o-w since 1992 The average cost to the city for a single ADA compliant ramp is 5900.00. Per Intersection the cost is$3.600 The average cost per foot of pedestrian walkway isS2.1,00 v The City and ADA Proposed G.O. Bond In the past five years the City of Las Cruces has Projects invested more than Five Million Dollars in updating the Cities infrastructure to comply with 202 Curb Ramps will be installed on the ADA. City Streets. All new construction is also being done in public ROW in compliance with the ADA. 92,848 if(17.5 Miles) of accessible sidewalk routes will be created. we will continue these eflorts until all Walkways in the City meet the needs of the Community. PROPOSED G.O. BOND PROJECTS ACCESSIBILITY IMPACTS DSD/ENGINEERING , APRIL 1998 .. 11 Milli iii iz Lohman Extension Phase II 4,242 0.80 4 $67,230.00 Missouri Ave. Reconstruction 14,378 2.72 50 $260,670.00 Solano Widening 5,990 1.13 20 $107,850.00 Mesquite Street Recon 3,024 0.57 20 $63,360.00 South Mesquite Recon 5,605 1.06 24 $105,675.00 Del Rey Boulevard Extension 7,265 1.38 4 $112,575.00 EI Molino Streets and SD 48,634 9.21 73 $795,210.00 Dona Ana Road Recon 3,710 0.70 7 $61,950.00 TOTAL ACCESSIBLE ROUTES 92848 18 202 $1,574,520 FEET MILES RAMPS COST a ` E 0-M ss /007� I ew iso VQ�W rvzl /N �3 act a -7o-w 6=f/cc P? he 4 (f?L,v Vtn In/�t-crvl.c. LIL 1 o -L->-CL- t � , C_,C o o / ,o-. a p