[Visitaccess] ramps, inclined planes

[Bruce F. Donnelly]

Katherine,

I'm counting on its not being an either-or proposition.  I am meeting with
Cleveland's Planning Director tomorrow on a form-based code.  I need to
figure out how to formulate this if I'm going to bring it up.  We have a
total 2-hour meeting, and have an enormous number of issues to cover.  So
far, I require a "Ground Floor Rise" (GFR) of dimensions chosen to fit each
built context, but (1) all of the residential entrances may "include or
consist of" a ramp; (2) the GFR only applies to the front façade, so the
floor level can be lower behind it; and (3) I want to encourage Visitability
by requiring a zero-step entrance somewhere and -- I hope -- a ground-floor
restroom for houses and storefront houses.

Yet, I can't count on much time.  If I get to mention it at all, I'll have
maybe 5 minutes total.  Statistics would help more than arguments based on
social justice.  Arguments that there is going to be a statistical need
would help.  Arguments that suggest that there is a market for such units
would help more.  

I am asking for stats for a reason, and dissing me doesn't give me one.

Too static <-> “Life” <-> Too noisy
--Christopher Langton
 
Bruce F. Donnelly
 
216 470 9348

-----Original Message-----
From: katherineaustin at comcast.net [mailto:katherineaustin at comcast.net] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 4:10 PM
To: bfd at accessplaces.com
Subject: Re: [Visitaccess] ramps, inclined planes

Yes Elanor, I agree with you completely. This back and forth with Bruce is a
waste of time. Let's get to the meat of the subject and find ways to make it
happen where it can and raise awareness among planners and architects about
the issue. 

I am not advocating zero step entrances in existing 300 year old town house
neighborhoods of eastern seaboard cities. I am concerned with new
developments being planned and developed every day. While we don't need to
mandate zero step entrances, neither do we need to mandate raised front
porches that prohibit access. 

There are huge cultural differences from state to state, city to city in
this country with different housing types appropriate to the local climate
and topography. We can learn much from historic building methods in these
areas that predate air-conditioning and elevators. At the same time, we
shouldn't ignore current technology AND social awareness. I don't believe
for instance we should continue to build separate bathrooms for people of
color in public places just because they were done that way 100 years ago,
if you get my drift.  

It is only personal opinion that front porches and stoops must be raised to
be useful. That's just plain nonsense! The historical article I distributed
to folks on this list about the history of the American Front Porch was very
clear on it's origin and demise. It also showed examples of dirt floor front
porches. The demise had to do with change in technology and social behavior
NOT anything to do with design or or elimination of porches! 

Instead of hanging on to past images of a perfect world, lets grow up and
move on and do what right for goodness sake!!!!

Gloves off,
Kathy Austin
 
> 
> --- Eleanor Smith <eleanors at mindspring.com> wrote:
> 
> > I have never seen anyone walking up steps with a
> > walker.  There is not
> > enough room to place a walker on a riser.  If
> > someone who uses a walker
> > is walking up a stairway, it would appear that some
> > helper is carrying
> > the walker up or down the stairs for the person.
> > 
> > The world is full of inclined planes and must remain
> > so.  The person who
> > cannot walk up or push a manual wheelchair up an
> > incline of 12%, which
> > includes many city sidewalks and the great majority
> > of curb cuts,  will
> > not go out alone into the world for long without
> > being stopped by earth
> > geometry and the human-made inclines that follow or
> > somewhat modify that
> > geometry (but not to the point of leveling it--which
> > is neither possible
> > nor desirable).   If a 1:12 slope is physically
> > impossible or harmful
> > for a person with a mobility impairment, they will
> > go out in a manual
> > wheelchair, with someone who can push them if they
> > cannot push
> > themselves.   Many people at that point will buy a
> > scooter or power
> > chair for those times when they intend to engage the
> > world outside their
> > home. 
> > 
> > >From a broader perspective, I personally am not
> > very interested in
> > engaging in debates about whether basic access to
> > virtually all new
> > homes, with a zero step entrance and wide interior
> > doors as sine qua
> > non, is desirable.  I take that as a given for this
> > Visitability list.
> > It's my hope that much of the dialog will center on
> > finding and
> > publicizing NU existing projects that demonstrate
> > good Visitable design;
> > noting quite openly NU projects that missed
> > opportunities to do that;
> > advocating and educating to specific NUists we know 
> > who are currently
> > developing residential projects that they design
> > with basic access; and
> > suggesting/acting to effect ways that CNU can
> > advance Visitability/UD
> > more explicitly and consistently within the
> > organization.   Interested
> > to hear what others on this list are looking for.
> > 
> > Eleanor
> > 
>