Transportation - Public Works Group Blog

July 26, 2011

Getting to Know PROWAG

A clearer understanding of ADA design seems to be on the horizon. Today, the U.S. Access Board released a formal set of proposed guidelines for accessible rights-of-way, also known as PROWAG, at a public briefing and press conference. This document, once adopted, will finally provide the elusive guidance those of us in the design community have been looking for since the passage of the ADA in 1990. And with a better understanding of how to best design compliant infrastructure, we will be able to better construct improvements that increase accessibility and meet the terms of the law. Unlike the new construction shown in the photo to the left.

Those of you interested in reading through the document will find it embedded below or at the link to the guidelines in the paragraph above. Accessibility Online is also hosting a webinar on August 9, 2011, to provide information about the guidelines. According to their website, the webinar "will provide an overview of the NPRM, including major issues addressed in the notice such as alterations to existing facilities, existing facilities that are not altered, and allowances for typical roadway geometry. Time will be allotted for questions and answers."

After reviewing the guidelines, you can submit any comments or suggestions before November 23, 2011, by following the directions at the beginning of the document. So far the main comment I will submit is based on something I heard at a seminar I attended at the Illinois DOT earlier this year. The presenters shared with us a requirement of providing a minimum 5% running slope for the curb ramp. This means ramps must now fit within a tight range of 5% to 8.33%. No one in the room could figure out why this was a requirement and less than 5% would be a problem. Design and construction of a curb ramp meeting all requirements is probably the most challenging and misunderstood element in the entire guideline so adding design restrictions without good reason exacerbates the problem. If there is a reason, then it is worth doing, but so far no one has provided one. I'd be interested to hear viewpoints on this requirement from others. Or if you want to share any other observations or information about the new guidelines or about accessible design in the right of way, feel free to comment below.

Proposed Accessibility Guidelines for Pedestrian Facilities in the Public Right-of-Way, July 26, 2011

July 8, 2011July 8, 2011

Climbing the Uphill Battle for ADA on a Non-compliant Curb Ramp

My primary involvement in ADA has been as an engineer designing and building infrastructure in the right of way and in years past, as a building inspector approving private development. During my career, I have always made a dedicated effort to learn about and meet the requirements of this federal law. But it's been a challenge shared by many other building and design professionals due to the lack of guidance materials and solid instruction from federal and state agencies. Fortunately over the last year that has changed for us in Illinois with state and federal agencies providing more training. But as frustrating as it has been for us, I can't begin to imagine how it is for those who have a disability and need to use these facilities. And today, I came up against another completely unbelievable hurdle.

The law was passed in 1990, and it has taken 20 years for the design community to receive clear guidance on how to comply with the law. The effect this seems to have had is that many engineers look upon the law as a joke thinking why comply – next year federal and state agencies will change it again. Or they ignore it or only partially comply because it must not be important enough if it has taken this long to put achievable guidelines in place. And they do not normally interact with the community most affected to see the impact of their decisions.

So one hurdle is just convincing engineers they need to follow the law. Our state has come out with the opinion that if a professional engineer knowingly designs or builds or approves a non-compliant ramp, they will pursue taking away their license. This is serious for someone who relies on the license for their job. Yet, when I share this with other engineers they do not believe it or think it could happen.

Fortunately there are engineers out there who do care and try to comply. I wonder sometimes what makes the difference. For myself, my dedication has built up over time as I better understood the requirements and particularly as I began to interact with those who have disabilities. They have really been the ones who helped me understand the importance of each regulation. Not complying does truly cause them hardship and at times it is painful and severe. It makes me wonder if we should be requiring a certification for ADA design that includes training and interaction with disability communities and groups.

Anyway, as difficult as all that has been to work through, today I got a call from a couple in our city complaining about a curb ramp we installed. They didn't like the design because they felt it would make it difficult to mow. I had tried to explain in two emails and out on the site that we were obligated to construct the ramp in that manner due to federal law. That the city risked liability and loss of use of road funds for highway improvements should we choose to ignore the law. And I added the part about losing my license. But they would have none of that. They questioned why other ramps are non-compliant, but it's difficult to convey how and why we got to this point over 20 years in just a few minutes. So they could not understand.

But in the end, I could tell by their attitudes, the bottom line for these people was that they were going to force the city to put in a ramp they liked no matter what. They obviously had total disregard for the law and our need to comply. They even threatened calling the newspaper and the state of Illinois to "tell on us." Which didn't make sense to me – were they going to tell them we put in a compliant ramp they don't like? Of course both they and their child had no visible disabilities.

All I could think was if I feel this frustrated and helpless just trying to build compliant infrastructure, how must someone feel who has to try to use non-compliant infrastructure? I can't even imagine telling someone with a disability, we chose not to comply with the law because these people thought it would cause them some difficulty in mowing around the ramp. We might be able to some day have designers on board, but how will we ever get healthy people with no disabilities to accept the need for compliance when all they care about is not having a minor inconvenience in mowing? And how can people have such total disregard for others?

April 4, 2011April 4, 2011

CCDD Update – Get the Scoop on CCDD & Let IEPA Know What You Think

If you’re involved in construction in Illinois, you are probably well aware of new CCDD law passed last year and made effective immediately by our state legislators and governor. Many of us have been struggling to understand this new law because it was created with little guidance but severe penalties for noncompliance. Fortunately the Chicago Chapter of APWA is helping to spread the news about CCDD by hosting a traveling seminar throughout the region. So, if you live or work in the Chicago Metro region, here are two possible seminars you can attend – just click on the title to go to the registration page (I know I’ll be at the one on the 27th!). You don’t have to be an APWA member to attend:

Continue reading “CCDD Update – Get the Scoop on CCDD & Let IEPA Know What You Think”

February 14, 2011September 12, 2013

A CCDD Update – February 2011

Background information for those just wandering into this legislative disaster:

Last year, some of our Illinois legislators passed a law to regulate and impose a fee on anyone trying to dump dirt in a hole. At least that's the way it started out. As you will see from this update, the IEPA has worked to amend the requirements of the law.

The bill started out as an Electronic Recycling bill but was soon changed to regulate the dumping of soil from a construction site. No one working in the industry seemed to be aware of it until a day or so after Governor Quinn signed it into law. This was when contractors began calling inspectors on their jobs asking the owner's professional engineer to sign the form that was now required to dump any load of dirt.

Because of the uproar and confusion over this law, the IEPA had a few meetings to try to find out what all the fuss was about. The meetings were only open to a select few, and from talking to those who did attend, it appears no further guidance or information was obtained from the sessions. Then, winter hit, and construction shut down.

And now the update:

Anyway, what we have all been wondering is, what's the current status?

First of all, we need to understand they are really still working through the formal rules. It appears the official rules will not be decided until next year even though we can be charged with a felony if they feel we haven't complied. So the following information, from what I understand, is the best we will get until they figure out what the law they passed really means.

Next, I heard through the grapevine (meaning this is totally unverified) that the aggregate industry was behind this. They supposedly wanted to minimize their liability in receiving construction material.

It also appears IDOT moved quickly to sign an intergovernmental agreement with the IEPA establishing their obligations. IDOT was obviously affected dramatically by this law since it immediately went into effect in the middle of the construction season. With millions of dollars of construction projects at stake, IDOT could not wait around for two years for everyone else to figure out what was really going on.

For the rest of us, there are now two levels of certification. If soil is obtained from an area that is historically considered to be residential, the Source Site Certification by Owner or Operator LPC-662 form must be filled out. This does NOT need to be signed by a professional engineer.

If soil is obtained from a commercial/industrial area, but is uncontaminated, the Uncontaminated Soil Certification by Licensed Professional Engineer LPC-663 form must be filled out. This form MUST be signed by a professional engineer. And of course not all of us who have PE licenses are comfortable with signing this based on our expertise. So many are hiring engineers with a background in soil contamination to sign for their projects.

And I guess there is still no official decision on whether moving dirt on the same jobsite from one hole to another is a problem. Here is the information on the IEPA website: http://www.epa.state.il.us/land/ccdd/index.html

How does this apply at the "ground" level?

The advice I heard so far from other engineers is to create a map of your city that is broken into two areas: one colored for residential and one colored for commercial/industrial. For public works departments, crews can then use this map to figure out what form to use for the material they excavate and need to dump. One idea is to create separate piles for residential and commercial/industrial. Then when the piles need to be hauled out and dumped, the proper form can be filled out and signed if necessary. Some cities are hiring engineers to analyze the commercial/industrial pile and then sign the form if found to be uncontaminated. If there is contamination, the pile is hauled to a special waste site.

The other idea is to just haul all material from a commercial/industrial site straight to a transfer station. Then the station is responsible for disposing of the material.

For projects, many are talking about having the residential form filled out and placed in the proposal documents for residential areas. For commercial/industrial areas, an engineer has to be hired during design to analyze the area and sign the form if necessary. This form is also included in the proposal. Also, provisions must be in the proposal for disposal of contaminated soil if found. And because a load that is certified to be uncontaminated can later be turned away, there must be provisions for who is responsible for disposing of that load. Because the soil from my project might be ok, but the contractor could go pick up a contaminated load and come back and try to tell me that was my soil. Now we have to pay for its disposal at a special waste site. And how am I to know? This is one area where it just makes everything that much more confusing and difficult to manage.

Some final tips:

Make sure you separate the pavement material from the soil. I was told having pavement material mixed in the soil will make it contaminated.

Also, tell the crews on the jobsite NOT to throw paint cans into the loads. This is a very typical practice on construction sites. But your clean load will come up contaminated at the dump site if this is done.

And finally, make sure you do your own research and talk to your attorney before deciding your process because no one still seems to know what is really going on. Feel free to post your own comments or experiences dealing with this law.

February 3, 2011February 4, 2011

Communicating a Snow Event

Most cities have formal procedures for handling winter storms including a public communications plan to issue press releases and answer phone calls throughout the event. But during the recent winter storm that swept across the U.S., Sean Stegall, city manager for the city of Elgin in Illinois, didn’t quite follow that traditional plan. Instead, from the beginning of the storm, he regularly posted on the city’s Facebook and Twitter accounts about 95 messages about the city’s winter operations. So based on his outstanding example, I have summarized a new plan for communicating to the public during a winter storm. And I would encourage anyone involved in snow and ice control to read through Elgin’s actual Facebook site – it’s well worth the click.

1. Publish the local weather alert and let people know where to get more information. This information should be issued in a press release, posted on the city’s website, and sent out through the city’s social media accounts, automated call services, and e-mail blasts.

Here is Elgin’s post on Facebook:
“The National Weather Service has issued a Blizzard Watch that will remain in effect for the City of Elgin from Tuesday afternoon through Wednesday afternoon. Questions or concerns regarding snow and ice control during the event can be directed to the Public Works Department through the cityâ€™s 24 hour Snow Command Center by calling 847-931-5977 or by emailing the Snow Command Center at snowcommand@cityofelgin.org”

2. As more information is received, follow up through the same channels letting people know about special rules in effect Â and how services will be impacted.

In Elgin, this included information about their snow plan, trash pickup, parking bans, emergency snow route activation, towing plans, road closures, material to be used for snow and ice control, regular city service closings, locations of warming shelters, reassurance of availability of emergency services, where to access regular updates, and contact information to report concerns over snow and ice control operations.

3. Once the storm hits, post information on social media channels about the snow and ice control operations and give people an idea about how often updates will be provided.

Stegall began his initial post on Twitter/Facebook by identifying himself and letting people know he would regularly update them throughout the night. The Facebook post ended up with 43 likes and 18 comments, most of which were positive and encouraging. Stegall participated in the dialogue by sharing some information about their operations:

“Did you know? According to our mechanics we experience significantly less equipment breakdowns the more snow we have. Why? Because the drivers push so much snow that the plows experience less fatigue, vibrationsÂ and run into fewer curbs as they stay in the center lane.” – Sean Stegall

4. Continue regular updates throughout the storm, and include information about equipment, schedules, staffing, status of services such as power, traffic conditions and road closures, weather conditions, emergency service response, and other relevant issues.

Stegall’s posts included photos of staff, equipment, road conditions, emergency conditions, all helping to illustrate and explain the event. The city even had a car fire incident and water main break during the storm.

5. Post snow plow location data if available.

A few times throughout the event, Stegall posted screenshots of the city’s AVL system. This is a GPS enabled method of tracking vehicles allowing people to see where plows are throughout the city.

6. Inform citizens if operations are suspended and let them know when they resume.

At one point during the storm, many agencies, including Elgin, made the decision to pull plows off the streets due to limited visibility. A suspension of operations is important to convey to citizens who might otherwise assume the city is still in snow removal mode. Below is how Elgin handled this announcement on Facebook. The post was followed with positive comments, encouragement, and understanding.

“City Manager Stegall here: We are pulling some snow plows off the road now. It is simply too dangerous. They cannot see due to white out conditions.”

7. Inform citizens of problems and property damage

Unfortunately, mailboxes are a regular casualty in snow removal operations. And in a storm like this, there’s bound to be more than the average number damaged. If an agency is aware of problems caused by their operations, posting this and then following up with information for resolution of the issue is important. Stegall, who was out riding in the plows throughout the storm, witnessed this himself and was up front about sharing the information with residents:

“City Manager Stegall here: I estimate that we have destroyed at least 50 mailboxes. You have my apologies if we did and you will also be reimbursed. The drivers hate it when this happens. They take great pride in their accuracy.”

8. Let residents know as operations near completion. Leave them with contact information and one last update on the status of operations.

Finally on the second day of snow-fighting operations, Stegall signed off with this final post:

“City Manager Stegall here: This will be my last post for awhile. At this point, the operations are humming. Please stay in touch via snow command (847) 931-5977. Thank you for all your support! Sean”