Comment submitted by Mary Anne O'Toole

Document ID: DOJ-CRT-2008-0016-0321
Document Type: Public Submission
Agency: Department Of Justice
Received Date: July 06 2008, at 12:11 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Date Posted: July 7 2008, at 12:00 AM Eastern Standard Time
Comment Start Date: June 17 2008, at 12:00 AM Eastern Standard Time
Comment Due Date: August 18 2008, at 11:59 PM Eastern Standard Time
Tracking Number: 80659109
View Document:  View as format xml

View Comment

My community is removing some ramped sidewalks in town, making it more difficult for people in wheel chairs to get around. They say this is because the ramps might lead blind people into dangerous areas, such as neighborhoods without sidewalks. The Village will not consider adding truncated domes to these sidewalk sections to address the concerns of blind pedestrians in these locations. They are saying that if you live in a neighborhood without sidewalks, it is OK to isolate you and not allow you to have the same mobility as a person who can walk. This is not a trivial inconvenience. In one case, this will more than quadruple the length a person in a wheel chair will have to travel to get to a store that is now approximately 300 feet from his house. We met with the Village and they will not make an exception to their policy as a reasonable accommodation. There are other locations in town where similar detours will be required. As I went through your proposed regulations looking for some support, a common theme seems to be that you need to get people to accessible elements. If a public sidewalk is an accessible element, you need to be able to get to that accessible element. If access to amusement park rides and boat slips and playgrounds must be provided, how can you tell someone they cannot access a public sidewalk? I would like to ask that this be addressed. In your section on parking you support the idea that people sometimes have to share space with vehicles. “If all pedestrians using the parking facility are expected to share vehicular lanes, then the ADA permits covered entities to use the vehicular lanes as part of the accessible route. The advisory note, however, calls attention to the fact that this practice, while permitted, is not ideal.” In a neighborhood with no sidewalks, wheel chair users have to use the streets just as more mobile pedestrians have to use the streets. It is not ideal, but to prevent someone from accessing a public sidewalk is unreasonable. The original ADA said a curb cut needed to be provided where a sidewalk meets the street. It did not say a curb cut needs to be provided unless the governing agency decides against it.

Related Comments

    View All
Total: 380
Comment submitted by Mary Anne O'Toole
Public Submission    Posted: 07/07/2008     ID: DOJ-CRT-2008-0016-0321

Aug 18,2008 11:59 PM ET
Comment submitted by Christine Hill
Public Submission    Posted: 07/07/2008     ID: DOJ-CRT-2008-0016-0322

Aug 18,2008 11:59 PM ET
Comment submitted by Charlene Couch
Public Submission    Posted: 07/16/2008     ID: DOJ-CRT-2008-0016-0366

Aug 18,2008 11:59 PM ET
Comment submitted by Duncan Crawford
Public Submission    Posted: 07/24/2008     ID: DOJ-CRT-2008-0016-0375

Aug 18,2008 11:59 PM ET
Comment submitted by William Horne
Public Submission    Posted: 07/24/2008     ID: DOJ-CRT-2008-0016-0377

Aug 18,2008 11:59 PM ET