Disabled Access Appeals Board Meeting

MINUTES DISABLED ACCESS APPEALS BOARD MEETING Thursday, November 17, 2016 1:00 PM CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS CITY HALL, MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA Board members Present: Hawkins, Stocker, Villalpando, Castaneda, Stevens Absent: None. Board Staff Chief of Inspections Services/Building Official John Kuehl and Present: Recording Secretary Alicia Salas CALL TO ORDER The hearing commenced at 1:00 pm CONSENT ITEMS Approval of Minutes 1. March 29, 2016 Action: Board member Hawkins motioned to approve minutes; Board member Villalpando seconds the motion. AYES: 3 BOARD MEMBERS: Hawkins, Stocker, Villalpando NOES: 0 BOARD MEMBERS: None ABSENT: 0 BOARD MEMBERS: None ABSTAIN: 2 BOARD MEMBERS: Castaneda, Stevens RECUSED: 0 BOARD MEMBERS: None PUBLIC COMMENTS None. PUBLIC HEARING 2. ADA Transition Plan Update Chief of Inspections Services/Building Official John Kuehl said he wanted to meet because the end of the year is approaching and he wanted to close out the year with a meeting so he could get feedback on a few discussion items. Mr. Kuehl said he wanted to give a presentation which would help give direction to the Board for the upcoming year. Mr. Kuehl said the ADA Transition Plan was put forward to the Board a couple of years ago and it was intended to be an active, moving document. He said it was a goal for the City to continue to try to remove barriers, to educate the public and staff, and to move in a forward direction as it relates to disabled access. Mr. Kuehl said one of the policies that has been adopted by the plan is the curb ramp design exception which has been used quite often. He said there is a great deal of construction going on around the City due to Measure P, the tax that was implemented to help with improvements to infrastructure. Mr. Kuehl said one of the priorities of Measure P was to increase accessibility by updating and/or installing several ADA curb ramps Disabled Access Appeals Board Minutes Thursday, November 17, 2016 at the corners. He said they have already completed several hundred corners with the intention to do more as Measure P moves forward. Mr. Kuehl said there are enormous challenges with grade, width, and try to get ramps at the back of curb ramps to allow people to transition to the very steep sidewalks. He said it has been a very useful tool for the design engineers which gives them a set of criteria and priorities to work towards. He went on to say they do the best they can to try to get full compliance, but when we can’t we have a reason and a place to document the noncompliance. Mr. Kuehl also mentioned a project coming down the road in the Capitol Improvements queue which the City has been pushing for is to gain full access, either by lift or elevator, to the museum at Colton Hall. He said this project has been approved, but would take a while to get the funding in place and to get proper approvals from the various boards and commissions. Mr. Kuehl also stated there are a couple of designs for the parking lot behind Few Memorial Hall as well as a design to put a lift at the City Clerk’s Office. He said this will make access into Few Memorial Hall easier. Mr. Kuehl said anyone who needs access to this chamber now has go all the way around the building in order to gain access inside. Mr. Kuehl said what has helped with the Transition Plan is to look at the City as a whole and prioritize those projects that have a more public importance and make those services and activities barrier free. He said he has reached out to other departments/divisions within the City to educate them regarding accessibility. He said he has stressed the requirement that everything the City does, either as a policy or a program, be accessible to all members of the public. Mr. Kuehl said a great success story is the website. He said Laurie Huelga, Communications Assistant, came to the board and discussed the City’s webpage and how it needed to come into compliance. He said Ms. Huelga has updated the website to help accommodate the visually and hearing impaired. Mr. Kuehl said Ms. Huelga works daily to make our database more accessible but it is difficult with the ever changing world of computer technology. Mr. Kuehl said there is a lot of swirling parts in the ADA, Title 24, Disabled Access world but not a ton of movement. Mr. Kuehl said one of the topics that the Board worked on was establishing a grievance system. He said we have used this system on many occasions and people seem to be satisfied with getting a response and answers to their concerns. Board member Stocker asked if there is any movement with making the Recreation Trail ADA compliant. Mr. Kuehl said it’s always a hot topic but it is hard to balance the requirements of City versus the requirements of the Federal Government. He said we could move forward ahead of the Department of Justice, but it would be a little dangerous because we do not have a precedent that is set. He said the issues of overcrowding and accessibility have been brought up but overcrowding alone on the recreation trail does not constitute an ADA issue. Mr. Kuehl said with the traffic and overcrowding issue it is more regulated under the vehicle code as opposed to the Disabled Access requirements. He went on to say the issue is not a forgotten issue. He said the City is implementing a wayfinding signage program regarding the recreation trail. Mr. Kuehl said he spoke with the Engineering department and relayed to them that when we install the signs they are mandated to follow guidelines from the Department of Justice as well as the California Building Code requirements. Mr. Kuehl agreed with Board member Villalpando that the recreation trail is a “shared use” path. Mr. Villalpando asked if the recreation trail falls under Parks and Recreation and Mr. Kuehl said 2  Disabled Access Appeals Board Minutes Thursday, November 17, 2016 it really falls under Traffic Engineering. He said it has been defined as a “shared use” path by the Department of Justice. Mr. Kuehl said people are using wider, larger, and faster motorized carts to get around. He went on to say abandoning motorized carts on the recreation trail will help with respect to the flow and safety, but people use motorized carts and wheelchairs to gain access to the trail and we cannot simply prohibit the use of those types of vehicles. Mr. Kuehl said the things that have been done; the grievance process and the policies adopted are working. He said they are helping with the amount of appeal hearings held and said he appreciates the work of the Board to facilitate that program. He also said reducing the amount of appeal hearings is always the goal. Board member Villalpando asked who decides priority as far as curb ramps throughout the city. He asked if it is something the neighborhood, or Public Works, or streets decides. Mr. Kuehl said it comes from all over and everyone gives their input but a number of factors get taken into consideration. He said the priorities are always hard; we try to hit the commercial areas and safe routes to school first. These are priorities because that’s where we see more pedestrians and the bigger need for curb ramp access. Board member Villalpando asked again about the Colton Hall lift and its location. Mr. Kuehl said there are a lot of opinions on how we should accomplish this task. He said the Museum had a historical survey done to establish the most historic parts of the building and it was determined that the back of the building would be ok to use for the purposes or upgrading and improving the building. BOARD DISCUSSION TOPIC 3. Right-of-way and Private Property - Parking Challenges Mr. Kuehl passed out Residential (apt. & condo) California Disabled Access, Non-Residential California Disabled Access Requirement, and ADA 2010 Standards; Title II and III pamphlets to the Board members. Mr. Kuehl said about a year ago the Board was deciding whether to adopt parking standards for the right-of-way. As a group, we decided to let the Department of Justice catch up and adopt standards. He said once the standards are set, the City will have a policy or procedure to go by. He said one project that posed a potential problem was 406 Alvarado Street, the Monterey Hotel. Mr. Kuehl said it was built incorrectly, so they had to come up with a fully accessible disabled access parking space. The Board decided that a good alternative was to create an on-street loading/unloading/disabled access parking which is in use now and so far it seems to be working. Mr. Kuehl said another new project that is coming down the road which will create an issue with ADA parking is Trinity High School at the old Bay View School site. He said they are asking the City to help accommodate a private facility’s parking issue. He said the building has no parking on-site, it’s only street parking. He said according to the Department of Justice’s guidelines - which have not been adopted, loading zones are supposed to be on sidewalks that are wide enough to accommodate them. Mr. Kuehl said we don’t have sidewalks that are wide enough and the person who is requesting the loading zone has a back end loading van. Mr. Kuehl said there is no way to accommodate that kind of loading zone. Board member Stocker asked Mr. Kuehl if the requester had proposed a possible solution. 3 Disabled Access Appeals Board Minutes Thursday, November 17, 2016 Mr. Kuehl said they are requesting two disabled parking spots painted blue which would be front to back and to leave a loading space in the front of the school open. Mr. Kuehl went on to say the problem with a disable access parking spot in the right-of-way means its open to anyone’s use. He said putting it in the right-of-way means it’s not designated for that one person and it does not meet grade and slope requirements. Mr. Kuehl said the California Building Code has adopted a new cycle. He gave some handouts to each of the Board members. Mr. Kuehl said the Department of Justice has not adopted the right-of-way guidelines yet. He said because this is going to affect off-street and on-street parking, in both public and private agencies, he wanted to pass along the most current information that was available to him. Mr. Kuehl said that one of the challenges is that it doesn’t really give a clear answer about how a city is supposed to handle existing on street parking and when is it triggered. He said, for example, if the City was to put in 20 parallel on street parking spaces, where would they go. He went on to say; according to the Guidelines the Disabled access parking space is to be as close to the front door of the business as possible, but our city does present its own issues. For example, on Alvarado Street where there are multiple businesses lining the street, where would be the best place to put the disabled access parking when you have several businesses lining the street? Mr. Kuehl next turned his attention to the Residential (Apartment & Condos) California Disabled Access. He said what California has tried to do in the last couple of code cycles is to align the accessible access portion of the California Building Code with the Americans with Disability Act. He said he checked the code and there is only one change in the Non-Residential section from 2013 to 2016 California Building Code: an electric vehicle charging station is not considered a parking space. Mr. Kuehl said the best thing Building Officials have done is to request the location of the charging station be on a flat surface for those who may need the charging station and be disabled. However he stated, this is not a requirement in the code. Mr. Kuehl next discussed the Non-Residential California Disabled Access Requirements which he said should include everything else outside of Residential. He clarified for the Board members that a single family home in a duplex does not require an accessible parking space and that it does not trigger the need for an accessible space. Mr. Kuehl referenced the last handout as the ADA 2010 Standards: Title II and III. Mr. Kuehl confirmed for Chair Stocker that the 2010 standards had been adopted and are now in place. Chair Stocker asked if all the handouts had not been adopted. Mr. Kuehl said all of them have been adopted with the exception of the Proposed Accessibility Guidelines for Pedestrian Facilities in the Public Right-of-Way. He said they are draft guidelines but it is used because it is the only thing to go by and if we don’t use them we will be out of compliance once it is adopted. Mr. Kuehl said he might be coming back in January regarding the school and will look for direction from the board as to what is considered an equal facilitation. Mr. Kuehl said all involved have come up with a temporary solution to help the situation until a more permanent solution can be achieved. He said what they came up with was to allow the school to have a movable ADA sign. Mr. Kuehl said they would place it in front of the school in two parking spaces to have the student unload in that area. He said typically for on street parking a time-limited parking space would be installed but if you have a placard you can park in a time-limited parking space, as long as it is not a red or yellow zone, longer than posted. 4 Disabled Access Appeals Board Minutes Thursday, November 17, 2016 Committee member Villalpando asked if there is a place on site that utility trucks use. Mr. Kuehl said there is some space on site but they would have to go through the football field, which would not be a paved path. He said they would have to take the fence down and put in a gate as schools are required to be gated, maybe a remote gate could work. Mr. Kuehl said there are other challenges as well. He said for example, there is a proposed building with no proposed parking. He went on to say according to the Code, it says “when required” with regards to parking. Mr. Kuehl proposed the question to the board; does that mean a parking adjustment is the way we get our equal facilitation for parking? Chair Stocker asked if a private person was using public property for private use, it would seem that the private party should be the one to provide and maintain the path. He said it should not be the City. Mr. Stocker said if that is not the way it works now then that is how we should make it work. Mr. Kuehl said we have a private project using public services in the right-or-way, which is for the use of everybody which would be passing all the business along the way that did put in parking. He went on to say there isn’t a simple solution. Mr. Kuehl said that when he does a pre-review of these types of projects, where there is no parking provided, he is trying to make them have parking space on their property for disabled access. Board member Villalpando likened the situation to a high rise in San Francisco which would take up the whole lot and not provide parking. Chair Stocker said every building will have a different answer, but if a private developer wants to use a public facility then they should have to provide the path they are proposing to use and if it is too steep then they have to provide on-site parking. He said one way or another they have to provide the parking. Board member Hawkins they should be making parking on the site and not blocks away. He said on Alvarado Street with the outside seating and the disabled parking, he is concerned that soon there will no regular parking. Mr. Hawkins said it’s already happening on Cannery Row too. Chair Stocker said the point is to make things accessible not to make it harder and they have to comply and provide the parking on the site. Mr. Kuehl, the City has removed almost all the disabled parking on street because they don’t comply. Mr. Kuehl said the question that comes up though, is it better to have something that “kinda sorta complies” or nothing. Chair Stocker said “kinda” is better than nothing. Mr. Kuehl said because of that we have thought of coming up with design exception allowances for existing situations that meet the intent of the Code. Committee member Villalpando said it’s like the temporary solution for Bay View High School with the movable sign. He said it is a good proposal for meeting the “grey area” where there really isn’t a requirement. He went on to say he thought the City was meeting request and the intent of the Code for that site. Committee member Villalpando asked when these new projects, that do not intend to provide 5 Disabled Access Appeals Board Minutes Thursday, November 17, 2016 parking, come up and want to use the City facilities is the City checking that once these projects are done the disabled parking requirement does meet the ratio. Mr. Kuehl said that the city is now doing that as it is a new situation. Board member Hawkins said he would like to explore the idea of making disabled access parking on-site a part of the Conditions of Approval. He also said that he liked the idea of having new developments allow disabled people from the general public use their privately owned lots without penalty. BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS Chair Stocker asked about the status of the 406 Alvarado Street project. Mr. Kuehl said the commercial side of the project is completed but they have not started the residential side. He said that temporary occupancy was given today to the hotel and commercial spots but they have not started the residential section. Board member Villalpando asked how come the fixtures in the bathrooms at Wharf 2 did not get more fixtures. Mr. Kuehl said the reason that bathroom did not get demolished and rebuilt with more fixtures is because it’s in a flood plain. He said if you demo more than 50% in a flood plain you are required to comply with minimum floor elevation; and it is in a velocity zone subject to wave action. This required it to be at least four feet off the sand and with 50 feet of ramp leading to it. He said it was remodeled according to Code as it relates to Disabled Access, which meant there wasn’t enough space for more toilets or fixtures. ADA COORDINATOR REPORT Mr. Kuehl thanked the Committee members for their work and asked them when they preferred to meet? Committee member Villalpando said he preferred to meet on an as needed basis. Chair Stocker said maybe gather some topics to discuss and meet as needed. ADJOURNMENT The meeting is adjourned at 2:16 pm Respectfully Submitted, Approved, Alicia Salas David Stocker Recording Secretary Chair 6