William D. Ankner, Ph.D.
October 25, 2002

     

Draft ADA Regulations – RIDOT Comment

The Rhode Island Department of Transportation supports the design and construction of sidewalks that are accessible to all individuals, and concurs with the need for coherent regulations to provide common sense guidance that will assure accessible routes, to the maximum extent possible, in all public rights of way.

Where new construction is involved, compliance with the proposed minimum clear width requirement of 48” appears reasonable and practical. However, in older urban areas, requirement could be difficult to meet and expensive to implement. There needs to be an allowance to exercise good engineering judgment when attempting to achieve this revised clear width on projects involving improvement to existing facilities. A public right of way equivalent to “technically infeasible” that can be equated to cost (money or time) should be expressly defined.

A typical urban roadway with sidewalk in Rhode Island is narrow, bounded by historically significant structures, and full of underground and overhead utilities. In many situations the utility poles are set close to the back of curb and the Right-of-Way line is coincidental with the back of sidewalk. An increase to 48” will be an economic impossibility for the majority of projects on these types of highways.

In those situations where utility poles would have to be relocated to provide the proposed clearance, the resulting expense would result in a reduction of funds available for additional ADA improvements as Rhode Island State law requires that if Federal funds are utilized for a project, the cost of any utility relocation must be borne by the State.

Although the draft regulations address the application of the technical requirements relative to the project Scope of Work, and that compliance will be “prorated” based on the extent of work planned, we remain concerned as to the expectations that will be raised by the new 48” standard, and how (and by whom) this will be interpreted particularly for lower-level projects such as roadway resurfacings. Should the standard be increased to 48”, it will frequently require that either utility poles will need to be moved, additional right-of-way acquired, walls rebuilt, or all of the above. We anticipate that the costs of attempting to comply would now far exceed the cost of the initial project and significantly increase the time to perform the engineering required to address these issues.

The increase in project complexity and costs associated with improving the corridor to the level of service required in the draft regulations will result in a drastic reduction in the amount of miles improved. We see this as a step backward rather than continued progress in our efforts to improve public rights-of-way to be accessible to all.


Submitted by:

William D. Ankner, Ph.D.
Director
Rhode Island Department of Transportation

Please note that the Rhode Island Department of Transportation supports the AASHTO Policy Resolution entitled: AASHTO's Response On The US Access Board's Draft Buidelines For Accessible Public Rights-of-Way and the AASHTO Comments and Recommendations on the Draft Buidelines.


 

left arrow index    left arrow previous comment   bullet   next comment right arrow