City Council Minutes 1993 01 05 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

A~ TRANSITION PLAN FOR CITY FACILITIES - PUBLIC HEARING Chris Miller, Staff Research Analyst, stated that this is the second hearing on the ADA transition plan. He pointed out that the transition plan represents series of guidelines that, over the next three years, will modify Louisville's City facilities. He recognized the Advisory Committee members that were present as: Mr. Pat Hornbostel, Ms. Carolyn Manzanares, Ms. Carolyn Markham, Ms. Anna Scott. Members not present are: Mr. & Mrs. Mike Jensen and Mr. Peter Stewart. Carolyn Markham, 1315 Franklin Avenue, Louisville, CO, stated that this is the kind of committee that she has advocated for a long time and she is proud to serve on it. She stated that they have gotten off to a good start, but it is just a start. She wanted to address the area of the transition that covers the modifying of City facilities via the City Codes to address the private sector by including ADA guidelines in the City Codes, so that they are addressed at the time people are applying for Building Permits. She felt that it was not only important that the City come into compliance, but also that the City encourage the private sector to as well. She would like to see that incorporated, at some point. Pat Hornbostel, 655 W. Hawthorn, Louisville, CO, pointed out that this is really a minimal plan. He stated that they are not going beyond what is absolutely required by the law and in some aspects it may not even be minimal. He stated that he ended up parking in the main parking lot and not in a handicap place. He knew Markham was going to be there, so he left her a space that is large enough for her van. The second place is filled with snow. He felt that the only way this plan is going to work is, if they can get the employees of the City to understand the needs of those that are disabled and to make the promise of the ADA a reality. Lathrop: In our discussions on the expenditure part of the ADA program, we spent $1,500.00 on the elevator at City Hall. We had a discussion about that and the appropriateness of spending $1,500.00 for audible signalization for the vision impaired, when we have a two story building. Could it have been better spent in our particular situation on something that would have been more useful, perhaps curb cuts? We'll probably find this situation again in the next several years, where we're mandated to do something, but does it really apply that much to us that we couldn't use that money in