HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-DAC-2015-02-04DISABILITY ADVISORY COUNCIL MEETNG PROCEEDINGS
CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK
Regular Meeting 12:15 p.m. February 4, 2015
PRESENT:
DAC Acting Chair – Sember-Chase
DAC Members:
David McElrath
Andrew Rappaport
Jody Scriber
OTHERS PRESENT:
Information Management Specialist – Myers
Sidewalk Program Manager - Hathaway
Alderperson/Liaison – Brock
Director of Parking - Nagy
Supt. of Public Works – Thorne
Engineering Technician – O’Connor
EXCUSED:
DAC Chair – Roberts
DAC Vice Chair - Gizewski
DAC Members: Anderson, Scott
Discussion Items:
Sidewalk Program Discussion with Sidewalk Program Manager (SPM) Eric Hathaway:
SPM Hathaway noted that Supt. Thorne and Engineering Technician O’Connor have been
assisting him in reviewing and evaluating sidewalks for repair/replacement. He is very
interested in whatever input the Disability Advisory Council can provide him regarding sidewalks
in general. He stated that the areas that he is especially interested in are as follows:
Barriers
Prioritization
Strategy
DAC Feedback
SMP Hathaway provided a Power Point presentation (which is attached to the minutes) to help
focus the discussion on the areas that need to be included in the city’s sidewalk program.
It is very important for him to attend DAC meetings because he values input from members of
the DAC very much. He wants all sidewalks in the city to be accessible for all individuals.
Disability Advisory Council Meeting Minutes February 4, 2015
2
DAC Member McElrath voiced his frustration regarding obtaining input from residents of Titus
Towers about sidewalks, and the lack of success he has had with the administration there to
help set up meetings to discuss this topic. He stated that he has also invited residents of Titus
Towers to attend DAC meetings with no success as well. He knows that residents can provide
valuable information to the City about prioritizing sidewalks that need work since most of them
use the sidewalks to get to the commercial businesses on Meadow Street.
SPM Hathaway responded that he would be happy to attend a tenant’s council meeting at Titus
Towers to obtain input from the residents’ there about any sidewalk concerns. He further noted
that he and Larry Roberts toured the city to look at sidewalks, and he also met with the Director
of Finger Lakes Independence Center (FLIC). He feels that it will be a good idea to follow up
and keep in touch with FLIC, and attend their meetings on an ongoing basis. He reported that
he met with representatives from TCAT, and discussed how to prioritize sidewalks for
repair/replacement that are in close proximity to bus stops. TCAT has been very helpful with
providing information to the City’s GIS staff so they can map them out. SPM Hathaway also
reported that he met with representatives from Tompkins County Office for the Aging, and will
be following up with them on a regular basis.
DAC Members also suggested that he set up meetings at Life Long (a senior citizen agency),
the Franziscka Racker Center.
Alderperson/DAC Liaison Brock arrived at 12:30 p.m.
SPM Hathaway stated that the city's website now has a way for people to submit information
regarding sidewalks. He also met with the ADA Coordinator at Cornell University who has been
very helpful, and he will be meeting with her on an ongoing basis.
Discussion followed on the floor regarding sidewalks and the many different types of repair that
are needed. Further discussion followed on the different methods that can be used in some
areas to make sidewalks safer until they can be repaired – such as grinding to make them even,
the application of foam under the concrete to raise the sidewalk to make it even, and
slab or mud jacking. He noted that mud jacking is being used by Cornell University; it has been
very cost effective for them – if done correctly. They provided him with contact information for
the contractor they have been using from Binghamton.
SPM Hathaway stated that the City is looking at how, in the long term, sidewalk and street
projects might be planned and the work completed at the same time.
Disability Advisory Council Meeting Minutes February 4, 2015
3
Supt. Thorne explained that raised ramps to sidewalks become problems for snow removal, and
can create problems for catch basins. The City is looking at the NYS Consolidated Highway
Improvement Program (CHIPS) for possible funding for street/sidewalk work. Any work done
must meet ADA requirements; there are many intersections that have more than a 5% grade
increase at the sidewalk, which the City is trying to correct. He further stated that it still needs to
be determined to what extent does the State require ramps to be included in street work. In
addition, there are drainage issues in some areas that the City doesn’t want to make worse. He
reported that a representative from the NYS CHIPS program will be meeting with staff next
week. They will look at ramps to get an idea of the work involved in order to receive funding.
SPM Hathaway noted that with street work, funded by CHIPS, there might be a requirement to
update ramps at the same time, which will mean that other ramps/sidewalks might not be done.
He showed the prioritization methodology he followed; and noted that he hopes to use CU
students during the summer to help with this work. Please let him know if there are questions or
if anything stands out as not quite what DAC is looking for. He would like to come back to the
next DAC meeting to further discuss the rating system.
Parking Program - Discussion with Director of Parking Frank Nagy - and guest - Bill
Geraghty from Digital and T2 - Demonstration of Pay and Display Machine:
Director of Parking Nagy reported that 23 pay stations have been ordered; which he hopes will
be here by March. He is very interested in discussing the future of parking with the DAC. He
further stated that with the new parking technology and everything being done electronically,
parking can be managed by ID information, and new services are being offered all the time.
He explained that an ID can be a NYS license plate number, and the easiest way to manage
vehicles is by license plate number. The parking technology can utilize a mobile phone system
for pay and display parking stations by use of the license plate number. He reported that his
staff is already using License Plate Reader (LPR) devices installed on their vehicles, and he
hopes to provide them with hand held devices in the very near future. He highlighted a few of
the system’s capabilities as follows: pay by plate number, make payments through a persons’
cell phone, citations can be paid through the pay stations, fast enforcement through the LPR,
easy to integrate with mobile phone applications, don't need to walk back to car to display ticket,
no need to number each space, and additional time can be added from anywhere.
He wants to set up a pay by cell phone technology that will help different larger agencies meet
their parking needs for vehicles with different drivers. Rates can be determined based upon
specific license plate numbers (i.e. special rate for handicapped people, or veterans based upon
different NYS license plates). The system can also force rotation of vehicles so that the rate is
cheaper for the first hour, and then the rate increases more and more for each additional hour.
Right now, the pay and display machines are just for the streets; however, he would like to get
them into the parking garages for uniformity, and to get away from a gated system which isn’t
very welcoming to visitors. He wants to make it as comfortable and convenient for people
coming in and out of the garages to pay for parking. He also stated that he is working with a
vendor to set up a system that might use different identification information -- perhaps with a
barcode system. He reported that there have been privacy concerns from the public about the
Disability Advisory Council Meeting Minutes February 4, 2015
4
identification information being stored and the long transaction time; however, the first time
someone enters their license plate number the machine will save it, then when a person uses
the machine again and starts typing in their license plate after the first 3 numbers a menu with
options of different license plate numbers will be offered for you to choose yours. The machines
will take paper, credit cards, and change for payment.
DAC Member Rappaport asked what the maximum distance is to meet ADA requirements
between parking spots and the pay station. Mr. Nagy responded that it would be 8-10 car
lengths; however, he noted that users don't have to use a station where they’re parked they
could use one closer to their destination. He also noted that placement of stations will be
determined by parking needs/use.
DAC Member Rappaport asked if the machines would maintain a record of cars and where
they're parked. Mr. Nagy responded that right now the information is kept for 48 hours, and if
no ticket is issued then license plate for that time period is kicked out of the system; tickets are
kept for 1 year. He will be only one that will have access to the identification information. If
someone wanted information on the owner, they would have to get it from New York State
Department of Motor Vehicles.
Mr. Nagy reported that with this new license plate reader system, the city has been able to place
yellow boots on vehicles where the Scofflaw applies, and collect more than $38,000 in revenue
since October.
Mr. Nagy highlighted other features of the system such as green initiatives (give discounts to
people with smaller cars based upon license plate), wanted criminal detection, amber alerts
based upon license plate information from the pay stations that can be passed right on to law
enforcement agencies. It will record occupancy (how many cars park on this street and for how
long), the city really needs this information to help determine rates for different areas of the city.
It may help with odd/even parking, and has the ability to monitor/enforce the 24 hour parking
limit rule. He asked DAC members to think about different locations on different streets that
they feel the machines should be placed - even if there is no handicapped spot there now. He
asked that anyone who had questions to please call him.
Acting Chair Sember-Chase asked whether Mr. Hathaway or Mr. Nagy might be able to attend
the March DAC meeting since time ran out for further discussion for today’s meeting. They both
indicated that they would plan on attending the March meeting.
Approval of Minutes:
Approval of the October 2014 minutes will be placed on the agenda for the March meeting
because there wasn’t a quorum for today’s meeting.
Adjournment:
The meeting adjourned at 1:40 p.m.
Sarah L. Myers Erin Sember-Chase
Information Management Spec. Acting Chair, DAC
City of Ithaca Sidewalk Program -
A Strategy for Accessibility
Eric Hathaway
Sidewalk Program Manager
ehathaway@cityofithaca.org
Today’s Workshop
•Barriers
•Prioritization
•Strategy
•Your Feedback
Standards
•Proposed Guidelines for Pedestrian Facilities
in the Public Right-of-Way (2011)
Resources Consulted
•Professional ADA Coordinator
•US Access Board Engineer
•Northeast ADA Center
•NYSDOT
•City of San Francisco
•US Department of Justice
How Do We Engage Others/Report
Requests?
•Currently Working with Local ADA Expert on
Best Practices
•Possibly Updating Non-Discrimination
Statement
•Best method(s) for Reporting Requests
Sidewalk and Curb Ramp Barriers
•Raised Sidewalk
•Excessive Running or
Cross Slope
•Gaps
•Loose Material
•Insufficient Width
•Absence of
Detectable Warning
Strip (Ramps)
•Excessive Flare Slope
(Ramps)
•Grade Break on
Ramp
•Excessive Counter
Slope
Width
Raised Sidewalk (Heave)
Cross-Slope
Sidewalk Steeper Than Roadway
Horizontal Openings
Surface Quality –
Firm, Stable, Slip Resistant
Pocking?
Pocking?
Surface Cracking?
Ramp Running Slope
Flare in Circulation Path
Grade Break
Grade Break Mid-ramp or not
perpendicular to path of travel
Utilities
Not on curb ramp runs, blended
transitions, turning spaces, or
gutter areas (New Construction)
Detectable Warnings
Street-Side Issues
•Drainage
•Gutter Counterslope
Poor Drainage at Ramps
Counter Slope
Prioritization Methodology –
Two Aspects
•Physical Condition
–Number of Barriers per
Block or Curb Ramp or
Worst Location Per Block
–Prioritize Curb Ramps and
Sidewalks Separately
•Location (Federal
Standard)
–Requests
–Paving Locations
–State and Local
Government Offices and
Facilities
–Public Transportation
–Places of Public
Accommodation
–Employers
–Other Areas
Other Considerations
•Maximum Extend Feasible
–Buildings
–Utilities
–Street Conditions
–Steep Grades
–Retaining Walls
•Benefit to Cost
–Is the Barrier in a High Priority Area?
New Sidewalk Versus Improve
Existing?
Primary Improvement
Methods/Projects
•Replacement
•Concrete
Cutting/Grinding
•Mudjacking
•Signal Projects
•Site Plan Review
•Milling/Paving Projects
Identify Priority Locations
Ways That You Can Help
•Identify Locations for Improvement
•Provide Input and Review 2016 Plan
•Site Visits Together
•Other?
Does This Plan Meet Your Needs?
TH
E
FU
T
U
R
E
OF
ON
an
d
OFF
ST
R
E
E
T
PA
R
K
I
N
G
in
IT
H
A
C
A
KE
Y
TO
P
I
C
S
:
*M
a
n
a
g
i
n
g
By
ID
:
*A
l
l
Th
i
n
g
s
El
e
c
t
r
o
n
i
c
*O
f
f
e
r
i
n
g
Ne
w
Se
r
v
i
c
e
s
MA
N
A
G
I
N
G
BY
ID
Wh
a
t
is
th
e
“I
D
”
?
?
?
?
?
Wh
y
?
?
?
?
•
Be
c
a
u
s
e
ev
e
r
y
o
n
e
ha
s
on
e
!
•
Mo
b
i
l
e
ph
o
n
e
pa
y
m
e
n
t
sy
s
t
e
m
s
ar
e
do
n
e
th
a
t
way already.
•
Be
c
a
u
s
e
we
ca
n
!
Sy
s
t
e
m
s
ar
e
no
w
in
t
e
g
r
a
t
e
d
.
They all talk
to
ea
c
h
ot
h
e
r
.
•
It
is
co
s
t
ef
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
.
Wh
a
t
Ca
n
Be
Ma
n
a
g
e
d
El
e
c
t
r
o
n
i
c
a
l
l
y
By
Th
e
License Plate?
•Pa
y
St
a
t
i
o
n
s
or
Me
t
e
r
s
–P
a
y by
Pl
a
t
e
•Ce
l
l
Ph
o
n
e
Pa
y
m
e
n
t
•Pe
r
m
i
t
s
•Ci
t
a
t
i
o
n
s
Pa
y
by
Pl
a
t
e
Pa
r
k
i
n
g
Be
n
e
f
i
t
s
of
Pa
y
by
Pl
a
t
e
:
•Fa
s
t
en
f
o
r
c
e
m
e
n
t
th
r
o
u
g
h
Li
c
e
n
s
e
Pl
a
t
e
Re
c
o
g
n
i
t
i
o
n
•Ea
s
y
to
in
t
e
g
r
a
t
e
wi
t
h
mo
b
i
l
e
ph
o
n
e
pa
y
m
e
n
t
s
•No
ne
e
d
to
wa
l
k
ba
c
k
to
th
e
ca
r
to
di
s
p
l
a
y
ti
c
k
e
t
•No
sh
a
r
i
n
g
of
Pa
y
& Di
s
p
l
a
y
ti
c
k
e
t
s
•No
ne
e
d
to
nu
m
b
e
r
ea
c
h
sp
a
c
e
•Ad
d
ti
m
e
fr
o
m
an
y
w
h
e
r
e
•Ra
t
e
s
ca
n
be
de
t
e
r
m
i
n
e
d
ba
s
e
d
on
sp
e
c
i
f
i
c
pl
a
t
e
•Fr
e
e
ti
m
e
ca
n
be
ma
n
a
g
e
d
mo
r
e
ef
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
l
y
•Fo
r
c
e
d
ro
t
a
t
i
o
n
ca
n
be
im
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
e
d
Di
s
a
d
v
a
n
t
a
g
e
s
of
Pa
y
by
Pl
a
t
e
:
•No
t
ev
e
r
y
o
n
e
me
m
o
r
i
z
e
s
th
e
i
r
li
c
e
n
s
e
pl
a
t
e
nu
m
b
e
r
•Pr
i
v
a
c
y
co
n
c
e
r
n
s
fr
o
m
th
e
pu
b
l
i
c
(B
i
g
br
o
t
h
e
r
)
•Ri
s
k
of
wr
o
n
g
pl
a
t
e
en
t
r
y
•Lo
n
g
e
r
tr
a
n
s
a
c
t
i
o
n
ti
m
e
Tr
e
n
d
i
n
g
In
Th
e
US
•Ci
t
y
of
Pi
t
t
s
b
u
r
g
h
,
PA
•Ci
t
y
of
Me
d
f
o
r
d
,
OR
•Bo
r
o
u
g
h
of
St
a
t
e
Co
l
l
e
g
e
,
PA
•Bo
r
o
u
g
h
of
Co
l
l
i
n
g
s
w
o
o
d
,
NJ
(P
b
P
or
P&
D
–Y
o
u
r ch
o
i
c
e
!
)
•Ci
t
y
of
La
s
Ve
g
a
s
,
NV
(F
o
o
d
tr
u
c
k
pa
r
k
i
n
g
en
f
o
r
c
e
m
e
n
t
)
•Oh
i
o
St
a
t
e
Un
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
•Lo
y
o
l
a
Ma
r
y
m
o
u
n
t
Un
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
•Pe
n
n
s
y
l
v
a
n
i
a
St
a
t
e
Un
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
•Po
r
t
l
a
n
d
St
a
t
e
Un
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
•Te
x
a
s
Te
c
h
Un
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
•Co
r
n
e
l
l
Un
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
On
th
e
ve
r
g
e
•Ci
t
y
of
Mi
a
m
i
•Ci
t
y
of
Se
a
t
t
l
e
Pa
y
by
Pl
a
t
e
Pa
r
k
i
n
g
Wh
a
t
ab
o
u
t
di
s
a
b
l
e
d
pe
r
m
i
t
s
?
Wh
a
t
ab
o
u
t
Contractor
Pe
r
m
i
t
s
,
Re
s
i
d
e
n
t
a
l
Pe
r
m
i
t
s
or
Vi
s
i
t
o
r
s
Pe
r
m
i
t
s
?
Pe
r
m
i
t
s
•Sa
v
e
ti
m
e
•Sa
v
e
mo
n
e
y
•Pr
o
t
e
c
t
th
e
sa
f
e
t
y
of
CS
O
s
•Ca
n
it
be
do
n
e
?
Ye
s
is
It
h
a
c
a
fo
r
it
?
Vi
r
t
u
a
l
Ci
t
a
t
i
o
n
s
Ho
w
Do
We
Ti
e
It
To
g
e
t
h
e
r
?
Li
c
e
n
s
e
Pl
a
t
e
Re
c
o
g
n
i
t
i
o
n
!
Ad
v
a
n
t
a
g
e
s
‐Ul
t
r
a
fa
s
t
en
f
o
r
c
e
m
e
n
t
–
10
x
fa
s
t
e
r
th
a
n
on
fo
o
t
, 60
0
0
pl
a
t
e
s
per shift
‐In
c
r
e
a
s
e
co
v
e
r
a
g
e
wi
t
h
le
s
s
st
a
f
f
–A
s
p
e
n
, CO
90
0
%
in
c
r
e
a
s
e
in coverage
‐Ca
n
ch
e
c
k
fo
r
me
t
e
r
pa
y
m
e
n
t
s
,
ce
l
l
pa
y
m
e
n
t
s
an
d
pe
r
m
i
t
s
‐Sc
o
f
f
l
a
w
ch
e
c
k
(5
or
mo
r
e
ti
c
k
e
t
s
un
p
a
i
d
)
‐Ti
m
e
li
m
i
t
en
f
o
r
c
e
m
e
n
t
2 Ho
u
r
,
24
Ho
u
r
,
72
Ho
u
r
or
5 da
y
Ti
m
e
Zones
‐Gr
e
e
n
in
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e
s
–m
e
a
s
u
r
e ca
r
s
–g
i
ve di
s
c
o
u
n
t
s
to
sm
a
l
l
ca
r
s
‐St
o
l
e
n
ve
h
i
c
l
e
de
t
e
c
t
i
o
n
,
(d
i
r
e
c
t
to
IP
D
)
‐Wa
n
t
e
d
cr
i
m
i
n
a
l
de
te
c
t
i
o
n
,
Am
b
e
r
Al
e
r
t
,
(d
i
r
e
c
t
to
IP
D
)
‐Oc
c
u
p
a
n
c
y
?
?
?
?
?
Ho
w
ma
n
y
ca
r
s
pa
r
k
on
th
i
s
st
r
e
e
t
an
d
fo
r
how long?
‐Sn
o
w
Re
m
o
v
a
l
No
t
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
Li
c
e
n
s
e
Pl
a
t
e
Re
c
o
g
n
i
t
i
o
n
FU
T
U
R
E
OF
PARKING
Wh
a
t
Se
r
v
i
c
e
s
Sh
o
u
l
d
I Of
f
e
r
?
IS
YO
U
R
PA
R
K
I
N
G
ME
T
E
R
ON
L
Y
ACCEPTING
PA
R
K
I
N
G
PA
Y
M
E
N
T
S
?
Wh
y
Ad
d
Ad
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
Se
r
v
i
c
e
s
?
Cu
s
t
o
m
e
r
co
n
v
e
n
i
e
n
c
e
Pr
o
m
o
t
i
o
n
of
Ci
t
y
/
C
a
m
p
u
s
in
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
Pr
o
m
o
t
e
re
t
a
i
l
wi
t
h
i
n
yo
u
r
co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
Ge
t
mo
r
e
ou
t
of
yo
u
r
in
v
e
s
t
m
e
n
t
Th
e
te
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y
is
th
e
r
e
to
pr
o
v
i
d
e
more than
pa
r
k
i
n
g
pa
y
m
e
n
t
s
:
Ci
t
a
t
i
o
n
Pa
y
m
e
n
t
Ex
p
i
r
a
t
i
o
n
Wa
r
n
i
n
g
by
Te
x
t
/
E
x
t
e
n
d
by
Te
x
t
Co
m
m
o
n
s
bo
o
k
i
n
g
fo
r
st
a
g
e
s
or
ar
e
a
s
.
Lo
c
a
l
Co
u
p
o
n
s
Ci
t
y
In
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
To
u
r
i
s
t
At
t
r
a
c
t
i
o
n
In
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
Mi
s
s
i
n
g
Pe
r
s
o
n
s
In
f
o
Re
l
o
a
d
i
n
g
of
T‐Ca
t
Ca
r
d
s
Qu
e
s
t
i
o
n
s
to
co
n
s
i
d
e
r
:
Ho
w
mu
c
h
is
to
o
mu
c
h
?
Wh
o
is
go
i
n
g
to
ma
n
a
g
e
th
e
se
r
v
i
c
e
s
?
Wh
a
t
sh
o
u
l
d
my
pa
r
k
i
n
g
me
t
e
r
s
be
do
i
n
g
?
Wh
y
no
t
ma
k
e
th
e
m
pr
o
d
u
c
t
i
v
e
?
TH
A
N
K
YOU!
Fr
a
n
k
Na
g
y
Di
r
e
c
t
o
r
of Parking
Ci
t
y
of
It
h
a
c
a
,
NY
fn
a
g
y
@
c
i
t
y
of ithaca.org
QU
E
S
T
I
O
N
S
?
?
?
Tw
o
Ho
u
r
Fr
e
e
Pa
r
k
i
n
g
Ho
w
ar
e
we
do
i
n
g
?
?
OCT
Th
r
u
De
c
e
m
b
e
r
31
st
20
1
4
We
ha
v
e
se
r
v
e
d
4,
1
3
3
cu
s
t
o
m
e
r
s
!
!
We
ha
v
e
gi
v
e
n
ou
t
7,
0
9
3
ho
u
r
s
of
parking!!
DI
A
sh
a
r
e
$2
,
3
0
5
.
2
3
Co
m
m
o
n
s
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
Sh
a
r
e
$2
,
3
0
5
.
2
3
Ci
t
i
e
s
Sh
a
r
e
$2
,
4
8
2
.
5
5
Mo
n
e
y
le
f
t
ov
e
r
$5
,
3
8
9
.
5
5
Bo
o
t
an
d
To
w
Le
t
t
e
r
Ho
w
ar
e
we
do
i
n
g
?
OCT
Th
r
u
De
c
e
m
b
e
r
31
st
20
1
4
Bo
o
t
Re
v
e
n
u
e
$
4,045.00
Le
t
t
e
r
Re
v
e
n
u
e
$1
8
,
5
2
3
.
2
5
Di
s
m
i
s
s
e
d
or
Wr
i
t
e
of
f
$1
1
,
8
4
8
.
2
5
To
t
a
l
of
f
ou
t
s
t
a
n
d
i
n
g
$3
4
,
4
1
6
.
5
0
Co
l
l
e
c
t
e
d
to
t
a
l
Re
v
e
n
u
e
$2
2
,
5
6
8
.
2
5