Saturday, March 03, 2007

3CDC Does Not Care About Handicapped People?

Posted by The Dean of Cincinnati

Picture courtesy of here.

UPDATE - 3/5/07:  It appears that the handrails are not a violation—Read more.

The Cincinnati Center City Development Corporation (3CDC) has “renovated” Fountain Square without any apparent concern for handicapped people.  Codes delineated through the Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards (UFAS) and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) state expectations for stairways and handrails—and these expectations have been totally ignored by 3CDC.  And, according to information at the United States Access Board website, state and local governments must choose between either UFAS or ADA for their own regulations.

From the Access Board site:

Conveniently, both UFAS and ADA have identical standards when it comes to the placement of handrails in regards to stairways.  We have placed the most significant details in bold:

As you can see, the following picture recently taken at Fountain Square shows 3CDC’s handrails in violation of both UFAS and ADA standards.  (The graphic at the top of this article shows a properly implemented design.)

Photo courtesy of here.

Some (like 3CDC employees who are blogging when they should be working to install handrails) may be tempted to argue this is a small detail, and that anyone should be able to use the handrails provided.  However, such a perspective ignores the simple fact that stairs going to Fountain Square on all sides are in violation of both UFAS and ADA.  They are not compliant with standards designed to accommodate disabled people.  They are in violation.

Previously, we reported on substandard design practices in the new garage relative to parking spaces and elevators.  Now, we can see these oversights to detail have put 3CDC in violation of UFAS and ADA. 

What other violations plague 3CDC’s Fountain Square project?  What other details have been overlooked given the total menu of 3CDC development projects?

When will these oversights be enough cause for alarm?

Socializer!

Anonymous comments are allowed, but you can create an account above to stamp your name and to avoid typing the anti-spam code.

If you are not familiar with our rules for leaving comments, click here! The Cincinnati Beacon is not responsible for the contents of any comments. Comments do not represent the views of the moderators of The Cincinnati Beacon.

Anon says:
03 Mar 2007  at  08:22 pm | #

I thought part of the building process in Cincinnati was submitting drawings for review and permit and then you built. If that is the case, then it seems that this one is on the city, and/or the architects and not 3CDC. I could be wrong, but it seems that this (if it is a violation) should be the responsibility of the permitting and code office of the City to catch these things.

says:
03 Mar 2007  at  09:22 pm | #

Ypur headline should have been “3CDC Does Not Care About People:, not just handicapped, another fine example is there “evicting” (under the guise of the property being sold to somebody else) the low income people living there so more luxury condos, up scale night club, etc. can go there.  Though the last instance I believe in the 1300 block of Race involved Western Souther Life, maybe they are moving their HQ there from DT?

Anon says:
04 Mar 2007  at  12:01 am | #

How do handrails and OTR relate?

I think the point of the first post is that the project would have never gotten a building permit if it didn’t follow the code and ADA rules. There’s no way a building inspector missed such an apparently glaring issue, only to have the Beacon point it out 5 months later. I think this story may be a bit of a stretch here.

Anon says:
04 Mar 2007  at  08:36 am | #

What is a bit of a stretch is the idea that the City would work in collusion with 3CDC’s corporate bigshots to sell our children’s and grandchildren’s future for campaign contributions. They have used the city extortion racket to penalize small owners and investors with Vacant Building Licenses while 3CDC gets a pass. This is selective enforcement of the law and needs to be challenged. If one building owner must pay for a VBL then all should be required to pay. By raising fees the city is the corporate enforcer. Forcing small owners and developers to sell out to the big guys. This is not much different than using eminent domain to seize property for private development. The means is different, the result is the same. This is a racket and 3CDC is the family.

Norwood Woman says:
04 Mar 2007  at  08:53 am | #

Quick, somebody contact the local Ohio Civil Rights Commission at 852-3344 for an investigation before there’s an injury or injuries!  They’ll sort through who’s responsible for what just like they did here in Norwood with a public garage that failed to provide proper signage and pavement markings for handicapped parking before and after it opened.  Channel 5 did a story complete with some handicapped parkers who couldn’t locate the handicapped parking spaces near the elevator. One was a congestive heart failure patient where every extra and unnecessary step really counts. The developer was found to be the responsible party and made the corrections almost, but not quite, overnight. No surprise that some of our elected officials at the time, 2-3 years ago, made public remarks sympathetic with the developer for having so many details to tend to that fully complying with handicapped parking regulations was overlooked.  Poor developer. Poor 3CDC. Bad whistleblowers, including and especially the Beacon, for exposing violations of handicapped regulations, hopefully before someone is hurt.

anon says:
04 Mar 2007  at  09:21 am | #

I thought part of the building process in Cincinnati was submitting drawings for review and permit and then you built. If that is the case, then it seems that this one is on the city, and/or the architects and not 3CDC. I could be wrong, but it seems that this (if it is a violation) should be the responsibility of the permitting and code office of the City to catch these things.

It is convenient to play the blame game. 3CDC has been given a pass by the city. City officials looked the other way because the word from Indian Hill directed them to do so. What accountability does the permitting and code office have in this?

Dereliction of duty is what this could be called. From the top down everyone needs to answer for this disgrace. City Council needs to investigate the entire history of 3CDC and examine the connections between the 2001 riots and the creation of 3CDC to gentrify OTR. Something smells bad in this whole scenario that happened during the Luken years. If current city officials do not open public hearings to investigate this corruption then they are complicit and stand with the wrong side.
What recourse does the public have to correct the rape of Cincinnati? We shall see.

says:
04 Mar 2007  at  11:03 am | #

The Construction License Agreement the city signed with 3CDC states that the construction work shall be completed in accordance to the ADA Standards of Accessible Design.  The standards are not hard to find—the Dean found them with just a little searching.  Later, we found much worse violations than the above.  It’s more than just the handrail issue.  It’s more than whether 3CDC cares about the handicapped, as the title asks.  It’s whether they are actually prejudiced against the handicapped.

We found that to get from some of the reserved handicapped parking places to the elevator that takes people using a wheelchair or walker to ground level, the person had to enter an on-coming traffic lane and go around a blind corner.  Agile people could step up onto the curb, but the curb cut was around this blind corner.  Scuff marks on the curbing showed that an injury or fatality of a handicapped person is just a matter of time.  Or maybe it will happen to a baby in a stroller.

You don’t need to read the ADA standards to figure out that this is a very dangerous situation.  3CDC did not make the situation better when they redid the garage—they actually made the parking situation for the handicapped much more difficult and dangerous.

formerly f says:
04 Mar 2007  at  12:42 pm | #

isnt their a ramp that leads to the same place off to the side of the stairs somewhere.  since the work at fountain square is a renovation as opposed to new construction:

4.1.6

No alteration of an existing element, space, or area of a building or facility shall impose a requirement for greater accessibility than that which would be required for new construction. For example, if the elevators and stairs in a building are being altered and the elevators are, in turn, being made accessible, then no accessibility modifications are required to the stairs connecting levels connected by the elevator.

if there is a ramp or an elevator that leads to the same level it meets ada guidlines.

the garage must be the new heimlich

Anonapotamus says:
04 Mar 2007  at  01:46 pm | #

formely f, no signs and no mirrors are a violation and it is a serious public safety matter, but I’m not suprised you’re being a corporate kiss ass. There’s new construction on the top of the square that is a serious violation.

“the garage must be the new heimlich”

No stupid, 3CDC is the new Heimlich and the Beacon busted them too!

Anon says:
04 Mar 2007  at  02:20 pm | #

The blame, if any at all, should then be put on the architects. It is their responsibility by law to adhere to ADA. This is NOT 3CDC’s job. That’s why you hire architects, that’s why there is a City building department complete with building inspectors and permits. You are crazy to even suggest that this was a deliberate attempt because 3CDC doesn’t like handicap people. Are you serious? How can this be called journalism? Are adults actually writing the stories here?

“A death is just a matter of time...” come on now.

By the way, those handrails do meet code.

says:
04 Mar 2007  at  02:54 pm | #

No alteration of an existing element, space, or area of a building or facility shall impose a requirement for greater accessibility than that which would be required for new construction.

Exactly.  Thank you for supporting our point.

says:
04 Mar 2007  at  02:55 pm | #

How do those handrails meet code?  It explicitly states they must be on both sides.

Crazy Anonymous says:
04 Mar 2007  at  03:19 pm | #

The blame, if any at all, should then be put on the architects. It is their responsibility by law to adhere to ADA. This is NOT 3CDC’s job. That’s why you hire architects

Who hired the architects? They don’t work for the city or the building department. The work for the HMFIC and that is 3CDC. After all, the theft of public property is theft regardless of who does it. This fiasco has been corrupted by the money just like Cincinnati has been for years. I, for one, am tired of public taxdollars flowing into private pockets just so the rich can have more while people go hungry and homeless. If the corporations aren’t going to act in a socially responsible manner then they need to leave before the angry citizens get out the tar and feathers.

Anon says:
04 Mar 2007  at  03:50 pm | #

"You are crazy to even suggest that this was a deliberate attempt because 3CDC doesn’t like handicap people. Are you serious?”

It isn’t crazy to suggest that this was a deliberate attempt because 3CDC doesn’t like handicap people. They made the handicap spaces smaller, there aren’t as many as there used to be and Fountain Sqare doesn’t meet the ADA codes.

“How can this be called journalism?”

Journalism is asking those in power the tough questions. It’s doing research and checking up on those that are supposed to look out for the public interest. The Dean was the first person to cover 3CDC’s funny math that pretends the public was only paying $4 million for the garage. The Dean broke Margaret Buchanan’s conflict of interest and showed how the Enquirer was selling us these lies.

“Are adults actually writing the stories here?”

It is unusual to see real reporting in Cincy!

says:
04 Mar 2007  at  04:29 pm | #

In response to Anon #10:

You are crazy to even suggest that this was a deliberate attempt because 3CDC doesn’t like handicap people. Are you serious? How can this be called journalism? Are adults actually writing the stories here?


I have seen the old location for the handicapped parking places and I have seen the new locations.  The old ones, with wide spaces between the slots so that someone could get a wheelchair to the car door, have been eliminated so 3CDC could pack more parking slots into the garage (and get more money from parking fees).  Most of the wide slots are gone, though often one could still get a wheelchair along one side of the car (but not on the other side).

There will be a video coming showing the situation more clearly.  3CDC is making the handicapped take safety risks that people with normal physical abilities do not have to take.  People with normal physical abilities do not have to go around the blind curb into oncoming traffic.  They can step up onto the platform for the elevator and stairs.  I do not believe that the people who run 3CDC can possibly be this ignorant.  They cannot possibly think that people with wheelchairs and walkers never want to go to Fountain Square.  They must have heard about the ADA.  Their contract even specifies that they will follow it.  3CDC made the decisions putting the handicapped at increased risk so that they could get more money and chose to ignore the ADA.  If you have a better word than “prejudiced” for this, I am open to suggestions.

Perhaps you are saying that 3CDC is so wildly incompetent that they are putting people in danger with every project they touch.  That, I guess, is possible, which is why I phrased my accusation as a question, “It’s whether they are actually prejudiced against the handicapped.” But they have been very successful in bilking the city for many millions of dollars, so I don’t think they are completely incompetent.  However, I concede it may be the case.

Either way, 3CDC has got to go.

formerly f says:
04 Mar 2007  at  04:57 pm | #

How do those handrails meet code?  It explicitly states they must be on both sides.

because the code does not apply to the construction that took place at fountain square.  the project was a RENOVATION not a new construction

let me again take something right out of the ADA guidelines

For example, if the elevators and stairs in a building are being altered and the elevators are, in turn, being made accessible, then no accessibility modifications are required to the stairs connecting levels connected by the elevator.

see where it says that if there is an accesibilty (in the example it involves an elevator but a ramp would serve the same purpose) you dont have to redo the stairs too? 

so the question is “is their handicapped accesibility at some point to that area that the stairs lead to?”.  if their is then it is in complaince with the ADA.

again it is NOT A NEW CONSTRUCTION project so as long as their is some pathway that allows handicapped access it is in complaince with the ADA.

another great “report” by the beacon

says:
04 Mar 2007  at  05:07 pm | #

In your example, there is an elevator and a set of stairs—neither of which are accessible.  In the renovation, the elevator is made accessible, and thus the stairs do not need to be accessible.

In our example, Fountain Square had both steps and ramps—and it was renovated to have steps and ramps.

Formerly, the steps had rails on both sides, and so did the ramps.

Now, the steps don’t.

I still fail to see your point.

says:
04 Mar 2007  at  05:09 pm | #

BTW:

4.1.6 Accessible Buildings: Alterations.

(1) General. Alterations to existing buildings and facilities shall comply with the following:

(a) No alteration shall be undertaken which decreases or has the effect of decreasing accessibility or usability of a building or facility below the requirements for new construction at the time of alteration.

Disagree says:
04 Mar 2007  at  07:35 pm | #

There are plenty of ramps in the new design, not to mention the steps are much easier to manage. In my opinion the square is much more accessible, and much more open. It’s a huge improvement over the old design which had 20’ drop offs, pits, and didn’t even have an accessible entrance along the entire length of 5th street - it was a huge uninviting wall. The old design was very introverted, uninviting, cold, grey, etc…

I also can’t believe that the code officials, or anyone associated with ADA would not have caught this already if it were an actual problem. Something isn’t right here. No offense to the Beacon, but I can’t believe that Beacon reporters are more knowledgeable about the ADA code than the code officials or the architects who designed this. I have to believe that it meets all ADA guidelines, and that this story is another attempt to take a cheap shot at 3CDC. Whether or not you agree with 3CDC and what they do within this City and OTR, this story seems too much of a stretch.

anon says:
04 Mar 2007  at  08:07 pm | #

We spent the price of a fine dinner and got a McSquare burger. Please feed us more.

Cincinnati Center City Disaster Corpse doesn’t look so good. Did anybody tell the enquirer?

Confused says:
04 Mar 2007  at  09:23 pm | #

"because the code does not apply to the construction that took place at fountain square.  the project was a RENOVATION not a new construction”

The code doesn’t apply to the new contstruction that took place on fountain square because it was a RENOVATION and not new construction?

formely f,you must be a lawyer.

says:
04 Mar 2007  at  09:45 pm | #

In response to formerly f (#16):

When one renovates something, the structure itself is generally left intact.  If a house is renovated one can tear off all the old plaster, remove the old wiring and plumbing, remove all kitchen and bathroom fixtures, replace all these with new, and still call it renovating.  But if one tears down the house and rebuild, that is called building new.

ADA does take into account that if one renovates there may be physical limitations as to how much one can do to comply, compared to building new.  For instance there may simply be no room for a ramp without doing structural alterations which can quickly get very expensive.

The old square was removed and the new square is built in its place.  This is new construction.  The parking garage structure, on the other hand, basically remained intact so it is more of a renovation.  That does not mean, as the Dean pointed out, that one can ignore the ADA.  One cannot decrease the accessibility and generally a certain percentage of the renovation budget has to be used to increase accessibility.

Since federal tax credits were used to fund these projects the requirements may have been tighter than if only private money had been used.  That’s just an educated guess at this point on my part.  I was involved in a small office project which involved only private money.  There 10% of the renovation budget had to be used for accessibility improvements.  We used it for a wheelchair ramp up to the front door, wider doorways, and a handicapped-accessible bathroom if I remember correctly.

Peter says:
04 Mar 2007  at  09:52 pm | #

"There are plenty of ramps in the new design, not to mention the steps are much easier to manage.”

I don’t think they said there weren’t enough ramps on the top of Fountain Square, they were talking about in the garage. The problem is the ramps on the square don’t have railings and neither do all the steps. From what I’m reading in the code It does seem to me that there are problems.

“In my opinion the square is much more accessible, and much more open. It’s a huge improvement over the old design which had 20’ drop offs, pits, and didn’t even have an accessible entrance along the entire length of 5th street - it was a huge uninviting wall. The old design was very introverted, uninviting, cold, grey, etc…”

There weren’t any 20’ drop offs and pits in the old design. It was a well designed public space and the public didn’t want these changes made. The square was inviting because you could see the fountain as you drove up 5th street. The square was always packed at lunch time and there was a lot more seating. The historic preservation society was against moving the fountain and if we were going to move it, we should’ve done it in 2000 when they took the fountain apart.

Why’d they get rid of the skywalk and a bunch of cool trees? Because of global warming? I’m sorry but our weather sucks a large part of the year and other cities are putting skywalks in. There still isn’t an accessible ramp on 5th street and you used to be able to sit on the wall. Now there’s no seating. Who wants to stand and watch a jumbo tron play a bunch of commercials? And the garage still leaks. It looks like Stephen Leeper and 3CDC really screwed this one up.

says:
04 Mar 2007  at  10:20 pm | #

In response to Disagree (#19):

You are right in saying that someone in an official capacity should have raised a ruckus about this long before.  And the old square did have some accessibility problems.  It was built before the ADA, but even so the city should have done some improvements.  I remember specifically that it was lacking some needed handrails that the city’s own building code demanded.

Which, in a way, tends to support our observations.  The city has failed before to comply with some basic requirements or to enforce the code.

The format of the Cincinnati Beacon allows others with fuller knowledge to correct us when we err.  Formerly f is trying, but he’s focusing on the difference between renovation and new construction, not the handrail requirements per se. Watch for the new video.  It’ll show a lot more stuff.

Anon says:
04 Mar 2007  at  10:23 pm | #

The closer you look, the worse it gets. The city needs to take control of this before someone gets hurt.

Anon says:
04 Mar 2007  at  11:21 pm | #

The ramps all have handrails as well as the stairs. The code referenced above referes to interior, or flights of stairs within a building. The application on Fountain Square is not quite the same, and has in fact passed all ADA codes. If you don’t believe me call down to the City Planning office and ask them. See what they say. I feel the Beacon should offer its readers at least that much effort. I’ll wait to comment further until a post detailing a conversation with either the planning office, or a registered architect is posted. Until then this is all simply speculation by a bunch of people who have strong opinions, but are not proffessionals when it comes to building codes. I’m sorry, but so far there hasn’t been one post from anyone that truly has merit in commenting on this issue.

Peter 2 says:
04 Mar 2007  at  11:33 pm | #

Dear Peter,

The garage leaks because of the work in front of the Westin. It sucks that it’s not done, and it sucks that it’s leaking. Wait until they finish and then lets see if it still leaks. Why didn’t they finish this portion earlier? Nobody will ever know, but maybe, just maybe the Westin told them to hold on. My guess is the City wouldn’t allow both sides of 5th street to be under construction at the same time though. Seems reasonable to me.

There will be furniture on the square. Have you noticed the huge Ice Rink out there now? Again, wait until they take it down and then complain. My guess is there will be lots of tables and chairs for people to sit on. Give it a couple weeks.

Why did they take the skywalk down? Do some city planning research and you’ll find that skywalks are coming down all over the country. It was a 1970’s city planning move that didn’t work. It’s works better in much colder climates, but the goal is to get people on the street level. Go read Jane Jacobs book Death & Life of Great American Cities. You might learn something.

People liked the old location of the Fountain. I did as well. It was great driving down 5th street in my car on axis with the fountain. However, it was more of an experience from the car. Now it has a more prominant seat on the square and relates much better to the pedestrian. This is the goal of the new design and I think it’s successful. It’s truly hard to tell with the rink still there, but in a few weeks when it’s all opened up I think you’ll be pleasantly suprised.

There were actually 2 large drop offs. On the east side near the 5/3rd tower there was an entrance to the garage which was literally down in a whole. There was also one, not as severe on the west.

There are actually more trees now on the square than there were before. Not all of them are planted yet due to the work still being completed on the 5/3rd facade which by the way is a separate project.

says:
05 Mar 2007  at  09:56 am | #

In response to Anon (#26):

The ADA code referenced above is for interior and exterior stairs and ramps.  In any event, one would expect the requirements for exterior steps and ramps to be at least as strict as those for interior ones due to possible snow, rain, and ice.

There is a separate argument, that no one has yet made, that 3CDC met the minimum ADA requirements on the ramps and so they do not have to meet the minimum ADA requirements on the stairs.  Based on my reading and experience I cannot answer this yet.  But even if this were the case, there are other codes for handrails that need to be met, and I suspect that they would be similar to the ADA requirements.  I can’t see where they would actually contradict the ADA ones, though they might be looser.

I’ve dealt with the city before on just this subject.  They refused to make the contractor (new construction) put in adequate handrails in a location that was accessible to the public and where there was a one-story drop-off.  The only reason for the non-conforming handrails was aeshetics.  It trumped safety.  Everyone who saw it knew the danger without looking up the code.  Yet the city, builder, architects, and building owner refused to do anything.  A few years after completion, just as I feared, someone did fall down and landed on the lower floor.  Only then was the problem corrected.  I heard there were no serious injuries, for which I am very thankful.  But that was due to the grace of God, not the responsible parties.

Code Expert says:
05 Mar 2007  at  12:02 pm | #

ADA does require handrails on both sides of stairs.

The problem is it does NOT require them on ALL stairs.

Only a certain percentage of access points must be ramps or accessible stairs.  The number is based on the occupant load, which could be found by looking at the permit drawings.

I believe this is a non-issue.  The new square is full of steps.  The whole fifth street side is steps. If your interepretation was correct, the whole place would be covered with handrails.

Code Expert says:
05 Mar 2007  at  12:07 pm | #

By the way.  The handrails would not be required, even if this was a completely new facility.

Code Expert2 says:
05 Mar 2007  at  03:10 pm | #

Code Expert, what’s your name and what makes you an expert? Just because you say that you are doesn’t really give us any reason to believe you. Are you the “expert” 3CDC hired?

Code Expert says:
05 Mar 2007  at  03:30 pm | #

I have no connection whatsoever with the project or with 3CDC, I swear.  But I really am a code expert.  I have a copy of the ADAAG, OBC, IBC, OFC, IRC, NFC, and NEC among others right in front of me.  Ask me anything building code related.  You or the Dean can call the Cincinnati Building Department, which issued the building permits, and they will tell you the same thing I am telling you.

Code Expert says:
05 Mar 2007  at  04:15 pm | #

BTW..There is always something you can do to make a space more safe or more accessible to handicapped people.  For example in the photo above, to the left of the stairs, you will see a drop off of approximately 2 feet.  Well, a drunk at Ocktoberfest could easily fall down that and break his neck.  The life-safety codes however try to be reasonable, and require a guardrail only when the drop is 30” or more.  Would it be safer with a railing?  Yes.  But if safety was your only consideration, you would never build any steps.  One story, non-combustible buildings would be the safest and would also be the easiest to make compliant with ADA.

Code Expert2 says:
05 Mar 2007  at  05:05 pm | #

"There is always something you can do to make a space more safe or more accessible to handicapped people.  For example in the photo above, to the left of the stairs, you will see a drop off of approximately 2 feet.  Well, a drunk at Ocktoberfest could easily fall down that and break his neck.”

Code Expert, that’s the point of the post I think. Since 3CDC tore up the old square and completely redesigned it, it should’ve become safer. It isn’t safer at all. There are steps without railings or color changes. As Mr. Patton said in the video, part of the reason for railings and color changes is to give you a visual cue that there is a level change. Sometimes things are legal but that doesn’t make them good ideas or the right thing to do. With a multi-million dollar project of this size I think 3CDC should’ve put a lot more thought into inclusive accessability. It’s not an improvement.

I think it’s only a matter of time before we see lawsuits. Who’s going to get sued, the architects, 3CDC or the city? My guess is the city, but 3CDC deserves the blame.

There’s no wheel chair access from 5th street and with the ice rink there, there’s also no access from Walnut street. Our handicapped citizens have to go all the way around to Vine st. to visit Fountain Square and that sucks!

says:
05 Mar 2007  at  05:31 pm | #

In response to Code Expert (#29, 30, 32, and 33):

I wished you had actually cited the part of the relevant codes.  I went back and looked again at the Fountain Square plaza.  It was built with two ramps up to the fountain and garage elevator level.  One ramp is off of Vine, and the other ramp begins near Walnut.

One BIG problem is that the ramp off of Walnut is blocked by the ice skating rink.  I looked around and could see no other way up to the garage elevator level than the ramp by Vine.  I asked a gentleman in a wheelchair by 5/3 how would he get to the elevator and he said he would go AROUND THE BLOCK.  Now I’m sorry for all those defenders of 3CDC, but there is no way that that can possibly be to ADA specs.

From my reading of the codes it does seem to me that not all stairs have to be ADA-conforming.  As Code Expert said,

Only a certain percentage of access points must be ramps or accessible stairs.  The number is based on the occupant load, which could be found by looking at the permit drawings.

Okay, but the ONLY access point that I saw that was ADA-conforming was the ramp off of Vine Street.  All the other stairs were non-conforming.  Several stairs had no handrails at all—none at the sides, and none down the middle.  And I am not talking just about 2- or 3-step flights, but longer ones.  So I do not believe that the Square conforms to the ADA requirements.

By the way, the 5th Street side has steps and handrails.  Not enough, IMHO, but there are some handrails.

But I would like to know your opinion of the steps by the corner of 5th and Vine.  This is where a secondary water feature was going to be added, but was quickly deleted from the plans.  There is a long run of dark granite steps with two angles and only one handrail.  This handrail is at the Vine Street end.  The granite, when looking from above, blends so well with adjacent blocks that it is difficult to see that there are any steps.  There is absolutely no color contrast when looking from above.  Handrails not only help provide balance for those who need it, but they also alert all of us that there are steps here.

3CDC=inefficiency says:
05 Mar 2007  at  07:08 pm | #

Good point Michael Earl Patton! Handicapped people have to go all the way around the block during the coldest part of the year when there’s snow and ice. There’s no skywalk anymore. I guess you’re right, 3CDC doesn’t care about handicapped people!

3CDC has got to go!

Tom K says:
05 Mar 2007  at  07:38 pm | #

Dean, you’re not a lawyer. Stop acting like one.

Stairways are only required to conform to ADA Rule 4.9 if they are required to be accessible by Rule 4.1. Rule 4.9.1 Even if Fountain Square could be considered a building,* the rules only require that “stairs connecting levels that are not connected by an elevator, ramp, or other accessible means of vertical access shall comply with Rule 4.9.” Rule 4.1.3.  In other words, Rule 4.1 requires that the only stairs that must comply with Rule 4.9 are those connecting levels without ramps or elevators.

The Square has no levels unconnected by ramps, and therefore its stairs need not comply with the Rule 4.9 requirements.

*A building is “any structure used and intended for supporting or sheltering any use or occupancy.” Rule 3.5.

Mike says:
05 Mar 2007  at  07:58 pm | #

First of all there are 3 ramps up to the square. Two of them are off of Vine Street, and the 3rd is a very wide and gently sloped ramp off Walnut. The Square is actually more accessible than it ever was, and safer without those large drop offs. Don’t you remember the old design? You may argue that there were 30 inch low walls between the square and each drop off, but I remember seeing many kids climb up there. Heck, I did myself during lunch. I’m suprised nobody fell and got seriously hurt. If all we have is to worry about someone tripping over a 4 inch step that’s a big improvement in my book. Would you rather a flat square? Come on now.

Please note that your initial assumption about the handrails is incorrect. Will you at least acknowledge that fact? No, because no matter what, all your opinions are clouded be a hatred for 3CDC and everything they do. No matter what. Not all of those stairs require handrails. That’s a fact.

You may say that all I do is defend their moves. Here’s what I disagree with:

I think the rink could be more accessible.
I think the handicap issue in the garage should be addressed.
I wish they had finished when they said they would.
I wish there was built in seating.
etc…

I think we will always disagree, because I can find some good in the project, and you will never admit that any move 3CDC has ever done can be a good thing. At least some can see both sides.

says:
05 Mar 2007  at  08:09 pm | #

Tom K:  Nice find.  You are right.

I’m still concerned about the Soutwest corner of the Square, where the rail-free edge and monochromatic step design makes it hard to see a level change…

says:
05 Mar 2007  at  08:13 pm | #

BTW, I will write an update to this story for the morning. 

I hereby apologize to 3CDC for thinking their stairway rails were not to code.  They were to code, apparently.  But I’m not so sure about the corner anomaly mentioned above.

Still, they are not friendly towards people with disabilities, for all the same reasons I have previously stated in our video focusing on the garage.  They should be more inclusive in their approach toward building a new Square.

So, my journey on the Square still has some safety issues that are pertinent.  I am thankful to have made this factual error, so that I was able to discover more profound threats to the safety of disabled people.

says:
05 Mar 2007  at  08:17 pm | #

Please note that your initial assumption about the handrails is incorrect. Will you at least acknowledge that fact? No, because no matter what, all your opinions are clouded be a hatred for 3CDC and everything they do. No matter what. Not all of those stairs require handrails. That’s a fact.

I wish I could prove the timestamp that went into my apology above.  I validated Tom K.’s comment, then spent some time looking closer at the ADA.  Then I decided to apologize.  Then I checked the queued comments again, and say your’s.  So, due to the time stamps, it looks like I only apologized because you said I wouldn’t…

If you were familiar with the TOTAL menu of things I have written about the Square, you would know that I KEEP TRYING TO ENJOY MYSELF THERE.

If Bill Donabedian knows what I look like, then he can confirm that I have watched Broomball games with my son while the camera man put us on the Jumbotron.  That was fun, but I still wish I had a place to sit to watch the games.

says:
05 Mar 2007  at  09:32 pm | #

In response to the Dean (#41):

I think that you are apologizing too fast.  See my comment to your new article and my #35 above.  The ramp from Walnut Street is blocked by the ice rink several months per year.  Therefore it does not count as an accessible route.  The only accessible route then is AROUND THE BLOCK to the ramp off of Vine.  The ADA rules say an accessible route to the bus stop on Walnut has to coincide to the maximum extent feasible with the general route used by people.  So the non-handicapped walk up the stairs to the parking garage entrance while the handicapped WALK OR WHEELCHAIR AROUND THE BLOCK?  I don’t think that conforms!

says:
05 Mar 2007  at  09:40 pm | #

On the subject of handicapped parking places:

I spent some more time looking at the ADA requirements.  There is supposed to be an access aisle 5 feet wide along the sides of the handicapped parking spaces.  And one out of every eight spaces should have an aisle 8 feet wide.

I have walked around a lot down there and I have not seen any handicapped parking spaces that come anywhere close.  Some spaces that are marked for handicapped don’t have any access aisle at all!

Apparently 3CDC eliminated the old access spaces so they could get more parking into the garage—ADA or no ADA. 

The more I look at the garage and square and the more I study the ADA rules, the worse it looks to me.  Sometimes I think that it couldn’t possible be that bad, but then I look again, and it is!

Mike says:
05 Mar 2007  at  11:28 pm | #

Apology accepted.

I was watching the news tonight (channel 5) and heard that 3CDC plans to make corrections to the handicap parking. It seems they do care. We shall see.

As for the Westin elevator I doubt this will ever happen. It’s never ever been an accessible entrance, is still owned by the City, and was never a part of the project. I can’t see why all of a sudden people are blaming 3CDC that you can’t get to the plaza this way. For some reason the City isn’t allowing it. Blame them. 3CDC has power, but they can’t control everyone. It’s odd, sometimes people want them to have less control, and then other times total control.

3CDC=inefficiency says:
05 Mar 2007  at  11:59 pm | #

"Apology accepted.”

Mike, actually the Dean was wrong to apologize. Walnut street isn’t wheel chair accessible right now and I think that’s a violation. It difinetely shows that 3CDC didn’t put any thought into the needs of handicapped people.

Why does it take Channel 5 to do a report for 3CDC to decide to address obvious problems? Why are they so far behind schedule?

“It’s never ever been an accessible entrance, is still owned by the City, and was never a part of the project. I can’t see why all of a sudden people are blaming 3CDC that you can’t get to the plaza this way. For some reason the City isn’t allowing it. Blame them. 3CDC has power, but they can’t control everyone. It’s odd, sometimes people want them to have less control, and then other times total control.”

The point is that 3CDC should have signs that let people know where the handicapped access is and have enough parking in that area that they aren’t confused like the elderly people in the video were. It is very confusing still and 3CDC should’ve been finished a long time ago.

3CDC doesn’t own the garage either, it’s a lease. It was very clever of 3CDC to keep that elevator out of that deal. It is a liability and 3CDC is only interested in the revenue stream.

“Blame them. 3CDC has power, but they can’t control everyone. It’s odd, sometimes people want them to have less control, and then other times total control.”

3CDC owns the politicians! That’s how they got this deal passed in record time even though the public was opposed. They control the Banks and now they are getting public money to gentrify OTR so yes we do blame council also. 3CDC doesn’t want the elevator or the hall and we don’t want them to have any more power, just responsibility.

Mike, how long have you worked at 3CDC? Do you know how much their projected annual parking revenue is for the next 39 years or is that “private” information still? I guess we’ll just have to wait and see.

Mike says:
06 Mar 2007  at  11:30 pm | #

I’ve read that it’s 100 million dollars. To be honest I really don’t care. It could be 500 million for all I care.

By the way, I’m honored that you think I work for them. Didn’t I tell you all that I’m a CEO? If someone stands up for the project then they must work for 3CDC. That makes alot of sense.

says:
07 Mar 2007  at  05:40 am | #

Your next video: Mr. Cripple goes to the Square!

Follow a wheelchair-bound personage as he/she gets ready to go downtown, enthusiastic about visiting the new Square.  Watch them park, look around the garage, get up to the Square, pay cash to park, etc. etc.

says:
03 Mar 2008  at  09:30 pm | #

its obvious who is cared for, my son is handicapped with autism an accept for tghe cleaning crew he is lauhed at a lot also how many bars did we need around the fountain,to bad they dont give coupons for kids to get a free ice cream this is something church groups could do joke hamilton county has a lot of well paid people filling out papers at mrdd and other supposed charities they obviously dont care.