|
David P Bishop, P.E.
|
October 25, 2002 |
The proposed guidelines dated June 17, 2002, have been reviewed by the city of
Federal Heights engineering and planning departments. The City of Federal
Heights recognizes the need for having ADA guidelines, if they are reasonable
and achievable. The City has considerable concerns if the referenced guidelines
are implemented, as the ramifications will be great
In general I feel that more thought should be given to outlining where this
guideline apply (business, commercial, residential areas). Also, it appear that
confusion will exist for the disable person when there are inconsistent facility
within the same intersection, example (upgrading curb ramps only as they are
deteriorating, which could mean less than all curb ramps within an intersection
are upgraded).
It appears that no consideration has been given to the size or economic strength
of a particular city. Cities with minimal capabilities to generate revenue
(smaller cities with small number of commercial business) will find it almost
impossible to comply. It is possible that necessary improvements will be delayed
or not accomplished for the smaller and poorer cities if they are required to
implement these changes or at best not until the safety of pedestrians have been
compromised.
The citizens are becoming increasing irritated at all the Federal Government
mandates programs. Who pays for mandated programs? The citizens who can ill
afford additional cost placed upon them. It seems to me that the Federal
Government should realize the hardship that all the mandated programs are
causing, before placing additional burden on the taxpayers.
The following are the City of Federal Heights concerns and comments in regards
to the draft Guidelines on Accessible Public Rights-of- Way:
• Sketches for each topic would help explain the intent
• I have many comments, but the bottom line is cost and capability of cities to
finance implementation of referenced guidelines.
Sincerely,
David P Bishop, P.E.
City Engineer
City of Federal Heights
index
previous comment
next comment
