Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Trans 2016-11-21 Item 2A - Update - ADA Transition Plan
City of Tukwila Allan Ekberg, Mayor Public Works Department - Bob Giberson, Director INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM TO: Transportation Committee FROM: Bob Giberson, Public Works Director BY: Scott Bates, Traffic Engineering Coordinator CC: Mayor Ekberg DATE: November 18, 2016 SUBJECT: ADA Transition Plan Update City Project No. 91510405 ISSUE Update on the federal ADA Transition Plan and present the draft document for the public comment period. BACKGROUND The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990 provides comprehensive civil rights protections to persons with disabilities in the areas of employment, state and local government services, and access to public accommodations, transportation, and telecommunications. Cities and other government agencies are required to have an ADA self- assessment and an ADA Transition Plan when they grow beyond a threshold of 50 full -time equivalent employees. This ADA Transition Plan focuses solely on accessibility within the public right -of -way and not on the City's programs or facilities. Lack of an ADA Transition Plan can prompt legal action from the Department of Justice, which oversees federal ADA compliance or can result in loss of Federal Highway Administration grants for transportation projects. In June 2015, the Transpo Group was contracted to perform the right -of -way self- assessment and develop an ADA Transition Plan for Tukwila, which has now been submitted in draft form. DISCUSSION The ADA Transition Plan is now required to undergo a public comment period of at least 30 days. A citywide press release will announce that the ADA Transition Plan documents will be posted on Tukwila's website; hard copies will be made available for viewing in the City Clerk's office, Permitting Center, and the Tukwila Community Center; and alternate accessible formats will be made available upon request, including braille, large font, or audible versions. During the comment period, the public, City Council, and staff will all have an opportunity to review the documents and submit comments. At the end of the review period, needed revisions to the draft ADA Transition Plan will be made and a final version will be presented to Council for consideration. Transition Plans are designed as living documents and are intended to be updated. The final adoption of the ADA Transition Plan will be done via Resolution. FINANCIAL IMPACT The ADA Transition Plan identifies a funding need of over $8M in 2016 dollars. The 2017 -2022 CIP includes $200,000 per year for the ADA Program. In addition, ADA barrier removal could be accomplished by developer improvements, street and utility projects, and waiver documentation (maximum extent feasible). RECOMMENDATION Information and discussion only. Attachments: Page 19, Proposed 2017 CIP Draft ADA Transition Plan (Appendices A — H are not included in this packet, but will be made available at the Committee meeting.) w 1pw englprojects'a- rw 8 rs projecls■ada transition plan (91510405)\into memo ada public review 111816 gl bg.docx 1 PROJECT: DESCRIPTION: JUSTIFICATION: STATUS: MAINT. IMPACT: COMMENT: CITY OF TUKWILA CAPITAL PROJECT SUMMARY 2017 to 2022 Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Improvements Project No. 91210405 Construct ADA compliant upgrades to City infrastructure in conjunction with a City developed plan. The enforcement of ADA laws and standards was delayed pending legal challenges and studies. Recent court rulings now mandate ADA compliance. The City must provide upgrades with most construction projects. Provide annual funding to construct improvements as necessary. Began the ADA Transition Plan in 2016 with adoption in 2017. The goal is to resolve ADA compliance issues within a reasonable time period. Negligible. Project will be ongoing until City facilities and infrastructure meet ADA requirements. This will also include ADA compliance by utilities and private development. FINANCIAL Through Estimated (in $000's) 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 BEYOND TOTAL EXPENSES Design 116 6 47 25 25 25 25 25 25 319 Land(R/W) 0 Const. Mgmt. 25 8 25 25 25 25 25 25 550 733 Construction 87 50 150 150 150 150 150 150 4,000 5,037 TOTAL EXPENSES 228 64 222 200 200 200 200 200 4,575 6,089 FUND SOURCES Awarded Grant 0 Proposed Grant 0 Mitigation Actual 0 Traffic Impact Fees 0 City Oper. Revenue 228 64 222 200 200 200 200 200 4,575 6,089 TOTAL SOURCES 228 64 222 200 200 200 200 200 4,575 6,089 2017 - 2022 Capital Improvement Program 19 2 City of Tukwila ADA Transition Plan \ove ber 2016 CITY OF TUKWILA 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 TukwilaWA.gov CITY ADMINISTRATION Allan Ekberg, Mayor David Cline, City Administrator Bob Giberson, P.E., Director of Public Works Robin Tischmak, P.E., City Engineer CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS Joe Duffle, President Dennis Robertson Verna Seal Kathy Hougardy De'Sean Quinn Kate Kruller Thomas McLeod Additional copies of this document are available online at TukwilaWA.gov/ADATransitionPlan For questions about Tukwila's ADA Transition Plan, please contact City of Tukwila - Department of Public Works 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite 100 Tukwila, Washington 98188 Phone: 206 - 433 -0179 Email: 2015ADAPLAN@TukwilaWA.gov Prepared by: Transpo Group 11730 118th Avenue NE, Suite 600 Kirkland, WA 98034 transpo roue car WHAT TRANSPORTATION CAN BE. NI 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS Tables v Figures v Executive Summary 1 1 Introduction 2 1.1 Plan Requirements 2 1.2 Plan Structure 3 2 Self- Assessment 5 2.1 Policy Assessment 5 2.2 Practices and Design Standards 6 2.3 Physical Barrier Assessment 6 3 Stakeholder Engagement 20 3.1 Engagement Methods 20 3.2 Meeting ADA Standards 21 4 Barrier Removal 23 4.1 Barrier Removal Methods 23 4.2 Barrier Removal Recommendations 24 5 Implementation 29 5.1 Approach 29 5.2 Prioritization 29 5.3 Transition Plan Cost and Schedule 37 6 Current Practices 40 6.1 Official Responsible 40 6.2 Current Grievance Process 40 6.3 Maximum Extent Feasible Database and Process 40 6.4 APS Policy 40 6.5 Accessibility of ADA Transition Plan Information 40 6.6 Barrier Removal Performance Monitoring 40 iv 5 TABLES Table 5 -1 — Accessibility Index Score Value 30 Table 5 -2 — Location Index Score Value 32 Table 5 -3 ADA Deficiencies by Type and Priority 34 Table 5 -4 ADA Barrier Removal Cost Estimates 37 Table 5 -5 Barrier Removal Duration by Priority Level 39 FIGURES Figure 2 -1 [Preliminary] Locations with substandard ramp landings, ramp widths, or ramp slopes 8 Figure 2 -2 Missing Curb Ramps 9 Figure 2 -3 Figure Curb Ramp Landings 10 Figure 2 -4 Figure Curb Ramp Landings 10 Figure 2 -5 Figure 2 -2 4 Curb Ramp Slope 11 Figure 2 -6 Locations Missing Truncated Domes 12 Figure 2 -7 Locations with substandard cross slope, vertical discontinuity, fixed objects, or sidewalk width 13 Figure 2 -8 Sidewalk Width 14 Figure 2 -9 Sidewalk Fixed Obstacles 15 Figure 2 -10 Non - Compliant Driveways 16 Figure 2 -11 Vertical Discontinuity 17 Figure 2 -12 [Preliminary] Locations with Non -APS push buttons 18 Figure 2 -13 APS Non -APS Push Buttons 19 Figure 5 -1 Accessibility Index Score 31 Figure 5 -2 Location Index Score 33 Figure 5 -3 Accessibility (AIS) & Location (LIS) Combined Score 35 Figure 5 -4 Accessibility & Location Combined Score (Signal Push Button) 36 Figure 5 -5 Planning Level Cost Estimate by Priority Level and Facility Type 39 v 6 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This document presents the City of Tukwila's public right -of -way Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Self- Assessment and Transition Plan. These two items are required elements of the federally mandated ADA Title II, which requires that government agencies provide equal access to programs and services they offer. While the ADA applies to all aspects of government services, this document focuses exclusively on the public right -of -way which includes sidewalks, curb ramps and pedestrian push buttons. This document summarizes the Self- Assessment, which includes a comprehensive assessment of the accessibility of pedestrian facilities as well as practices and procedures which relate to them such as curb ramp design standards. It also contains a Transition Plan, which identifies a schedule for the removal of barriers. The document also identifies how the City will address requests for accommodations in a consistent manner. 1 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 PLAN REQUIREMENTS The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) was enacted on July 26, 1990, and provides comprehensive civil rights protections to persons with disabilities in the areas of employment, state and local government services, and access to public accommodations, transportation, and telecommunications. Cities and other government agencies are required to have an ADA self - assessment and transition plan when they grow beyond a threshold of 50 full -time equivalent employees, which includes the City of Tukwila. There are a number of different transition plans a city must conduct, with this one focused solely on accessibility within the public right -of -way. Lack of an ADA transition plan can prompt legal action from the Department of Justice, which oversees federal ADA compliance or can result in loss of Federal Highway Administration grants for transportation projects. There are five titles or parts to the ADA of which Title II is most pertinent to travel within the public right -of -way. Title II of the ADA requires Public Entities to make their existing "programs" accessible "except where to do so would result in a fundamental alteration in the nature of the program or an undue financial and administrative burden." Public rights -of -way are part of the City's program. This effort was initiated by the City of Tukwila to satisfy the requirements of ADA Title I I Part 35, Subpart D – Program Accessibility § 35.150 (d)(3) which states: The plan shall, at a minimum — (1) Identify physical obstacles in the public entity's facilities that limit the accessibility of its programs or activities to individuals with disabilities; (10 Describe in detail the methods that will be used to make the facilities accessible; (110 Specify the schedule for taking the steps necessary to achieve compliance with this section and, if the time period of the transition plan is longer than one year, identify steps that will be taken during each year (iv) Indicate the official responsible for implementation of the plan. Accessibility standards used in this project, which pertains to sidewalks, curb ramps and pedestrian signals along City owned streets and roads, were developed by the United States Access Board. The US Access 2 8 Board is an independent federal agency created in 1973 to ensure access to federal funded facilities. The standard, which is called the Proposed Guidelines for Pedestrian Facilities in the Public Right -of -Way, or PROWAG, was published for comment in 2011 but has not been adopted. Despite this delay, many cities currently use the 2011 proposed guidelines as their standards. When PROWAG is eventually adopted by United States Department of Justice (USDOJ), it will become an amended section to the 2010 ADA Standards, which is the document in which all federal ADA standards are collectively documented within. Other City facilities such as buildings, playground and pools are also subject to Title II program accessibility requirements but are governed under other ADA standards, not the PROWAG. 1.2 PLAN STRUCTURE The structure of this plan was organized to closely follow federal ADA transition plan requirements. This includes: • Chapter 2 - Documents self- assessment findings including physical barriers as well as practices or design standards that result in accessibility barriers. • Chapter 3 - Documents public engagement efforts. • Chapter 4 - Describes both programs and mechanisms the City will use to remove accessibility barriers and identifies a number of detailed recommendations the City should implement to remove accessibility barriers moving forward. One of these recommendations includes appointment of an official responsible for implementation of this transition plan. • Chapter 5 - Outlines a schedule for the transition plan, including prioritization of projects, planning level cost estimates and potential funding sources. • Chapter 6 - Provides the City with a location to store important and evolving plan information such as where how this plan should be accessible, annual performance tracking, document of the official responsible and other items that will change over time. Best practices were identified and incorporated throughout the planning process beginning with the Scope of Work. In addition, key best practices are highlighted throughout the document as call -out boxes. A number of appendix items are included separately: • Appendix A — Open House Materials • Appendix B — Self- Assessment Barrier Map • Appendix C — Self- Assessment Asset "Mapbook" • Appendix D — Barrier Audit 3 9 • Appendix E — Cost Estimate Backup • Appendix F — Maximum Extent Feasible Documentation Template • Appendix G — Grievance Process • Appendix H — APS Policy 4 10 2 SELF - ASSESSMENT Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requires that jurisdictions evaluate services, programs, policies, and practices to determine whether they are in compliance with the nondiscrimination requirements of the ADA. This section describes the data collection process and resulting inventory of sidewalk and curb ramp facilities within the City of Tukwila public rights -of -way. To inventory the existing sidewalk and curb ramp facilities in both a cost - effective and accurate way, Transpo Group and City staff worked in coordination throughout the inventory and self- assessment process. The inventory and self- assessment is described in these sections. 2.1 POLICY ASSESSMENT The City of Tukwila primarily addresses planned pedestrian facilities in the Walk and Roll Non - Motorized Plan (2009), Transportation Element (2015), and in the City's Municipal Code. To determine what ADA programs, policies, and practices are currently being implemented, the previously mentioned sources as well as Transportation 2040 (PSRC, 2010) and Countywide Planning Policies (King County, 2012) were reviewed. 2.1.1 Method The documents mentioned above were reviewed for content involving existing ADA programs, policies, and practices including any PSRC or county requirements that may be in place. ADA - related content was then compiled to see how they compare to one - another. ADA practices and designs are discussed in section 2.2. 2.1.2 Findings The Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) contains two codes pertaining to ADA compliance and design. TMC 11.12.140 states that all street improvements and non - motorized facilities shall be designed and constructed to meet the intent of the ADA. The code also states that all curb ramps shall be in compliance with State laws and Federal guidelines. These codes are the primary source that details ADA requirements in the City. Policies found in other documents are more general in nature, such as policy 13.2.11 of the Transportation Element which says that intersections and sidewalks should promote pedestrian safety and foster walking as a viable mode of transportation. The Transportation Element also refers to the City's Walk and Roll Plan, though ADA programs, policies, and practices are not directly discussed in the Walk and Roll Plan. 5 11 2.2 PRACTICES AND DESIGN STANDARDS Practices and design standards that meet accessibility standards are essential to ensure new or upgraded pedestrian facilities are accessible and that these upgrades contribute to the removal of accessibility barriers throughout the City. This section summarizes a review of City practices and design standards for barriers and includes major findings of this work. Complete documentation of this work can be found in Appendix D. The audit was conducted in November of 2015. 2.2.1 Method The City of Tukwila maintains adopted design standards for pedestrian facilities. These standards are used for City funded projects as well as privately designed and constructed projects within the public right -of -way. Street design standards included in the Fourth Edition of the Infrastructure Design and Construction Standards (City of Tukwila, April 2010) were audited for compliance with ADA guidelines found in Public Rights -of -Way Accessibility Guidelines (US Access Board, 2011), WSDOT Design Manual (WSDOT, 2013), and WSDOT Field Guide for Accessible Public Right -of -Way (WSDOT, 2012). 2.2.2 Findings As a result of the ADA barrier audit, a number of changes to the current City standards are recommended to comply with ADA requirements. These recommendations are grouped into four categories: Sidewalks, Crosswalks, Curb Ramps, Signals, and Other Pedestrian Areas and can be found in Appendix D. 2.3 PHYSICAL BARRIER ASSESSMENT 2.3.1 Data Collection The self- assessment included a robust data collection effort that included 24 different attributes for sidewalks, 20 attributes for curb ramps, 13 attributes for signal push buttons, and 5 attributes for locations where curb ramp appear to be missing. Attributes were collected in the field with a team of six staff that covered ADA facilities in the City of Tukwila over a six -week period. The following sections describe the methodology for collecting data for the self- assessment. Appendix B includes the data collection inventory maps. Note that all maps are as of September 2015, and the City will work to actively maintain this database in the future. 6 12 2.3.1.1 Field Training Transpo Group trained IDAX staff to conduct data inventory using iPad units with GIS geodatabase information. Attributes for the City's sidewalks, curb ramps, and signal push- buttons were collected in October 2015. Data collection in the field The orientation training included work sessions that fully defined the study purpose and specific sidewalk, curb ramp, and signal push- button characteristics to be inventoried. The training also included demonstration of the use of the iPad units and Collector for ArcGIS application to measure and record specific sidewalk, curb ramp, and signal push- buttons characteristics. IDAX staff then conducted field and data collection under supervision to ensure consistent and accurate measurement of sidewalk and curb ramp measurements as well as correct recording of information using the Data Dictionary. 2.3.1.2 Process Data collection staff were provided iPad units with the Collector for ArcGIS application installed, tape measure (to measure sidewalk and curb ramp dimensions), and a smart level to efficiently and accurately measure sidewalk and curb ramp slopes. For sidewalks, the predominant sidewalk characteristic was recorded for the length of the block from one intersection to the next. Each existing curb ramp or street corner with missing curb ramps were recorded individually. When duplicate measures of the same attribute, such as flare slope (each ramp has two flares), were recorded, the worst measure for accessibility was recorded. The physical inventory included; • over 70 miles of existing sidewalks • approximately 440 signal push- buttons • approximately 1,000 curb ramps 2.3.1.3 Quality Control Pre - planning for the physical inventory effort included the identification of regular quality control and evaluation of the raw data. Initial review of the raw data was provided by Transpo Group. City Staff also reviewed data. Data discrepancies or errors, including missing data, were identified and coordinated with staff to re- inventory problem areas. As with all manual data collection, a few small inconsistencies occurred during data collection, mainly regarding default values when inputting inventory. 7 13 Secondary data collection efforts to replace questionable or missing data were conducted and addressed the most significant issues. 2.3.2 Findings The following sections detail the primary barriers inventoried and analyzed for ADA compliance. State and Federal regulations dictate that curb ramps and sidewalks be ADA compliant. The findings conclude that a majority of the pedestrian curb ramp and sidewalk facilities are in need of improvement to meet requirements. 2.3.2.1 Curb Ramps The majority of the existing curb ramps are non - compliant based on current ADA requirements. Non - compliance is often primarily attributable to: • The top landing is either missing or of inadequate width; • The ramp width is too narrow; or • The ramp running slope is too steep. The construction of many of the non- compliant ramps preceded implementation of ADA requirements. Leeway is given in the PROWAG to road grades and existing roadway geometric design, recognizing that in some circumstances the curb ramp should be built to PROWAG requirements to the maximum extent feasible. 8 • Non - Compliant Curbs • Compliant Curbs Figure 2 -1 [Preliminary] Locations with substandard ramp landings, ramp widths, or ramp slopes 14 e Roman Municipal Ai rprrt Legend Curb Ramp Missing --f City Limits Potential Annex Area `�. Link Light Rail Parks Water Bodies Satt:e-Tacora Interna .tonal Ai part 99 ri—r1 0 0 5 Miles Locations without curb ramps, but include an adjacent pedestrian route (e.g. sidewalk) Curb Ramp Missing Tukwila ADA Transition Plan DRAFT FIGURE transpogroup l r 2 -2 9 15 Legend ._,King Conn nterna-iah ld"porti e Renton Municipal Airport - •• • Substandard Landing 0-- ▪ City Limits Potential Annex Area ��. Link Light Rail Parks Water Bodies Seatie- Tacora International Airport 99 r�1 0 0.5 Miles Landings are at the top or bottom of a curb ramp and measured as a square or rectangle. The minimum standard area for a landing Is 4ft x 4ft. 10 Curb Ramps: Substandard Landings Tukwila ADA Transition Plan tfanspo DRAFT FIGURE r 2-3 16 e Rcntan Mun icipal Airrnrt Legend Curb Ramp Slope • > 1 OD /o • 8.3 -14% a =8.3%o j1 City Limits Potential Annex Area Link Light Rail Parks Water Bodies Seatte- Tacor Interna.ion al AI-part 99 Curb ramp slopes less than 8.3% is the acceptable standard. Curb Ramp Slope Tukwila ADA Transition Plan DRAFT FIGURE transpogroup T 2 -4 11 17 e Raman Municipal kirpnrt Legend No Truncated Domes �1 City Limits Potential Annex Area r"r"\—• Link Light Rail Parks Water Bodies Battle- Taco1a Internarional Airpar 99 Ramps without tactile warning surfaces where the curb ramp ends and meets the roadway. r—rm 0 0.5 Miles 12 Curb Ramps: No Truncated Domes Tukwila ADA Transition Plan DRAFT FIGURE transpo r 2-5 18 • Non - Compliant Sidewalk • Compliant Sidewalk Figure 2 -7 Locations with substandard cross slope, vertical discontinuity, fixed objects, or sidewalk width 2.3.2.2 Sidewalks Several miles of sidewalks in the City of Tukwila are non - compliant based on ADA requirements. Non- compliance is often primarily attributable to: • The sidewalk width is too narrow; • The sidewalk has a fixed object that impedes on required usable pedestrian space • Non - compliant driveways intersect the sidewalk • The cross slope of the sidewalk is too steep; or • The sidewalk has locations of cracking and heaving that create vertical discontinuities. While the construction of narrow sidewalks may have preceded implementation of ADA requirements, many of the non - compliant sections of existing sidewalks may be attributable to deferred maintenance. 13 19 King Corn Interna:io W rpo e Renton Municipal 5rpart Sidewalk Width Meets ADA Standards Doesn't Meet ADA Standards r City Limits Potential Annex Area Link Light Rail Pa rks Water Bodies 9 0.5 Miles Width is measured as the minimum usable width for a sidewalk segment, generally 5f1. There are approximately 2.4 miles of Substandard Sidewalks within City Limits.Roadways without data displayed do not have sidewalks. 14 Sidewalk Width Tukwila ADA Transition Plan s,Flg -[l; SidewalkVO4.1111.n,aJ DRAFT FIGURE transpagroup 7r 2 -7 20 Legend Sidewalk (Fixed Objects) Sidewalk (Less than 5ft) City Limits Potential Annex Area Link Light Rail Parks Water Bodies Sidewalk Fixed Obstacles & Barriers Tukwila ADA Transition Plan DRAFT FIGURE transpogfoup ill 2-8 15 21 Legend Non - Compliant Driveways 7 or More 5_6 3-4 1 -2 fl City Limits C- 1 Potential Annex Area Link Light Rail Parks Water Bodies ti 16 Sidewalk With Non - Compliant Driveways DRAFT FIGURE r 2 -9 Tukwila ADA Transition Plan transpo 22 e Rcnton Municipal Hirpnrt Legend Vertical Discontinuity Extreme >3/4" Significant <3/4" Moderate <1/2" Minor <1/4" None f1 City Limits Potential Annex Area Link Light Rail 11/4, Parks Water Bodies Seatt e- Tacorla Internarion al Ai•po t 99 4 0 5 Miles Vertical discontinuities including cracks or bumps that result in abrupt edges. Segments are measured against worst location on block segments. Sidewalk Vertical Discontinuity Tukwila AAA Transition Plan DRAFT FIGURE t anspo roup'l 2-10 17 23 2.3.2.3 Signal Push Buttons Accessible Pedestrian Signals and Push Buttons is an integrated system that communicates to pedestrians in a visual, audible, and vibrotactile manner when to cross a street at a signalized intersection. Non- compliance is often primarily attributable to: • Use of Style H -1 Push buttons • Other non -APS style push buttons APS Non -APS While crossings with push buttons provide dedicated crossing time to the pedestrian, the use of APS push Figure 2 -12 [Preliminary] Locations with Non -APS push buttons buttons are required to meet ADA standards. Non -APS locations in the City may be attributed to the crossing having not been upgraded since the requirement was put into place. All push buttons must be upgraded to APS when adjustments to the pedestrian push button crossing system are made at the location. 18 24 Legend APS Push Button A Non-APS Push Button d1 City Limits Potential Annex Area Link Light Rail Parks Water Bodies Signal Push Buttons: APS and Non-APS DRAFT FIGURE Tukwila ADA Transition Plan 2-12 transpogi oup -hr 19 25 3 STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT Public and stakeholder input is an essential element in the transition plan development and self - evaluation processes. ADA implementing regulations require public entities to provide an opportunity to interested persons, including individuals with disabilities or organizations representing individuals with disabilities, to participate in the self - evaluation process and development of the transition plan by submitting comments (28 CFR 35.105(b) and 28 CFR 35.150(d)(1)). There were three primary goals for the public outreach activities prior to adopting the plan: • Meet Title II requirements for public comment opportunity. • Inform the public about the City's plan and processes regarding removal of barriers to accessibility within the right -of -way. Provide information to assist interested parties to understand the issues faced by the City, alternatives considered and planned actions. • Obtain public comment to identify any errors or gaps in the proposed accessibility transition plan for the public rights of way, specifically on prioritization and grievance processes. 3.1 ENGAGEMENT METHODS 3.1.1 Open House An open house event was held on January 13th, 2016 at the Valley View Sewer District offices. The objective of this event was to engage the community on the federal requirements for ADA planning and educate participants on the City's ADA Transition Plan development. Activities included a combination of presentations and interactive displays to obtain community input on issues and priorities. YOURPAIO11.ITIES NF: BOGESTOBSTACLE waermso VIV#JurvEhi A* pat I s °theresh[:uld :he r PiiIORITIaE IMPROVEMENTS Open house board for capturing public priorities An interactive exercise was conducted as part of the open house activities. It provided an opportunity for attendees to provide input on the Plan's priority strategies. The exercise assisted in identifying key themes to move forward in development of the Plan. Participants were asked to select their highest priorities related to physical obstacles and key 20 26 destinations. This exercise provided valuable input on the perspectives of the users and facilitated discussion regarding the Plan priorities. Announcements for the open house noted that materials in alternative languages and formats were available upon request. 3.1.2 Project Website and E -mail address The City of Tukwila developed a project website (www.tukwilawa.gov/ departments/ mayors- office / key- city - plans- and - projects /ada- transition- plan /) for easy on -line access to project information and ways to provide feedback. The Draft and Final ADA Transition Plan documents were also available on the website. A project e -mail address 2015ADAPLAN ©TukwilaWA.Gov was also sent up, allowing people to submit comments directly via e -mail. 3.2 MEETING ADA STANDARDS Per 28 CFR 35.150(d)(1), public involvement is required as follows: A public entity shall provide an opportunity to interested persons, including individuals with disabilities or organizations representing individuals with disabilities, to participate in the development of the transition plan by submitting comments. A copy of the transition plan shall be made available for public inspection. The Draft City of Tukwila Transition Plan was made available for public review and comment for a 30 -day period beginning December 8th, 2016 and ending January 20th, 2016. A link to the draft plan was provided on the City's project website. The City also distributed copies of the draft plan to viewing locations around the City including the office of the City Clerk, The Public Works permit center and the Tukwila Community Center. Alternate accessible formats of the document were made available upon request, including Braille, large font, or audible versions. The City issued a citywide press release announcing the availability of the document. A letter was sent to the disability groups within the City announcing the availability of the draft plan and directing interested stakeholders to the City's website and viewing locations. Title VI Nondiscrimination Law Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is a Federal statute and provides that no person shall, on the grounds of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial 21 27 assistance. This includes matters related to language access or limited English proficient (LEP) persons. The City of Tukwila ADA Transition Plan public participation process included translation service upon request for open house materials, draft plan and open house. Additionally, the open house was specifically held at the Valley View Sewer district because the build has better accessibility than City Hall and is in close proximity to cultural destinations of LEP communities. 22 28 4 BARRIER REMOVAL Removal of accessibility barriers within the public right -of -way is the primary purpose of ADA transition plans. The following section documents the primary methods of barrier removal and contains recommended changes to city policies, practices and design standards to comply with state and federal requirements related to ADA accessibility in the public right -of -way. 4.1 BARRIER REMOVAL METHODS The City can utilize a number of methods to remove accessibility barriers in the public right -of -way. These methods range from stand -alone projects, removal of barriers as part of other City roadway projects, utility projects, removal of barriers by development and MEF (Maximum Extent Feasible). In order for these methods to be effective, City practice and design standards must comply with federal ADA guidance. If they are not, new or reconstructed pedestrian facilities may not be constructed to accessibility standards, requiring costly revision and increasing the duration it will take the City to remove accessibility barriers. 4.1.1 Stand -Alone ADA Projects As identified the in transition schedule, the City of Tukwila has committed to dedicated funding for ADA barrier removal projects targeted for removal of high - priority barriers as identified in the self - evaluation. The City already funds ADA improvements as a part of other projects, but by creating a dedicated funding stream for ADA barrier removal, investments can be targeted to those locations where improvements are most needed, rather than where other projects are funded. 4.1.2 New or Widened Roads The Capital Improvement Program (CIP) defines and shows funding for the City's capital projects including street improvements ranging from minor street widening to street extension projects and utility projects which impact sidewalks. A variety of short and Tong -range plans, studies and individual requests help identify projects which are then included and prioritized. The City of Tukwila updates its CIP bi- annually and coordinates with other jurisdictions, WSDOT, and the community at -large with regards to timing and project priorities. Pedestrian improvements (new or replacement) are generally included as part of these street improvements and using this plan, accessibility barriers are now easier to identify and include in CIP projects. 23 29 4.1.3 Street Overlays To maintain the City's street system in good condition, the City completes street overlay projects which includes reconstruction of part of the roadbed. These projects are required to reconstruct non - compliant curb ramps. Street overlays have been one of the primary methods that accessibility barriers, especially related to curb ramps, have been removed within the City. 4.1.4 Traffic Signal Upgrades The City upgrades existing traffic signals for a variety of reasons, often with the goal of reducing vehicle congestion. When these upgrade occur, the City has the opportunity to ensure that push buttons and pedestrian signals meet current accessibility standards including: button location and position; non - visual format of indicating "WALK" and "DON'T WALK" using audible tones; and vibrotactile surfaces. 4.1.5 Utility Upgrades or Repairs Utility upgrades or repairs to water, sewer, communication or electrical systems can impact the pedestrian network. The City should work internally and with utility partners to ensure that pedestrian facilities are rebuilt to be ADA compliant if altered by projects. 4.1.6 Private Development Even with a variety of City funded accessibility improvements, it will take many years to remove accessibility barriers or remove sidewalk gaps. Redevelopment of properties such as construction of new housing or commercial buildings or major remodels can provide a valuable boost to barrier removal efforts. For example, non - accessible driveways represent a major barrier within the City, representing roughly 20% of the overall transition plan cost. 4.2 BARRIER REMOVAL RECOMMENDATIONS An assessment of City policies, practices and design standards, as documented in Chapter 2, was conducted to understand the process that results in barriers to accessibility in the public right -of -way. This assessment was informed through a review of adopted City plans, field observations, discussions with City staff and a detailed design audit (see Appendix D). The recommendations included below were developed in response to this assessment and have been written in such a way that recommended actions are clearly identified and progress on each specific recommendation can be easily tracked and updated. 24 30 Recommendation 1: Updated City design to match the PROWAG guidance Status: Underway A detailed audit of City design standards using the Proposed Accessible Guidelines for Pedestrian Facilities in the Public Right -of -Way (PROWAG), WSDOT Design Manual (July 2013) and WSDOT Field Guide (2012) was conducted to inform Chapter 2. This audit, which is included in Appendix D, recommends a number of specific changes to the City's Infrastructure Design and Standards (Infrastructure Manual) including additional construction tolerances or more details defining maximums around slope. Recommendations for the design of sidewalks, crosswalks, curb ramps, signals and other areas such a work zones are also identified. The City should update the Infrastructure Manual or adopt design standards from another agency that meet PROWAG standards. Recommendation 2: Identify an official responsible for Transition Plan implementation within the Public Works Department Status: Completed (October 2016) The Director of Public Works, Bob Giberson, has been identified as the official responsible (see Section 6.1 Official Responsible for more information). This position, often referred to as the "ADA coordinator ", is one of the four major federal requirements for every ADA transition plan. The ADA coordinator is responsible for facilitating city transition planning such as responding to grievance requests. Recommendation 3: Adopt a Citywide APS policy Status: Completed (October 2016) Accessible Pedestrian Signal (APS) policies serve as a means for cities to be consistent with ADA requirements at traffic signals. The APS policy covers the location and means of communication for APS devices that "communicate information about pedestrian timing in nonvisual formats such as audible tones, verbal messages, and /or vibrating surfaces" (MUTCD). The City has an adopted APS policy (see Section 6.4) Recommendation 4: Educate City staff, consultants and contractors on PROWAG standards Status: Pending Transition plans are often a learning experience for City staff, consultants and contractors alike since they change existing practices and expectations. The City should use updates to the City's design standards as an opportunity to teach and learn about accessibility and the barriers 25 31 that those with limited mobility or sight experience when traveling in the City's public right -of -way. Education can take many forms from review of updated design standards with key individuals such as field inspectors and contractors, development and review of City specific design standards or checklists with City engineers, or training from groups that serve those with disabilities. Recommendation 5: Clarify and enforce requirements around accessibility through construction zones Status: Underway Work zones should provide the same level of accessibility as permanent pedestrian facilities covered by ADA requirements. Pedestrian accessibility needs to be maintained in areas of street construction and maintenance. Tukwila should review standards and policies to ensure that alternative walking routes are secured within designated work zones. Recommendations 6: Develop a standard grievance process for barriers in the public right -of -way Status: Underway Public entities subject to Title II of the ADA are required to adopt and publish a grievance procedure as part of their transition plan. A grievance process allows community members to formally report denial of access to a City facility, program, or activity on the basis of disability. It is recommended that the City of Tukwila adopt a grievance process that is easy to initiate, transparent and responsive. A process like this could include a two -step approach to comply with the requirement for grievance procedures. The first step of the process would be to file a "Request for Service" and the second step to file for a "Grievance ". A Request for Service allows the public to request accommodations or barrier removal. A request should be possible in- person, by telephone, by mail, or via e-mail and should be recorded in the Public Work' Maintenance Management System (MMS). Information on how to file this should be easily accessible. The recording of the request is critical for recordkeeping and to evaluate the Department's response to ADA - related requests. The second step, a Grievance, is used to report denial of access to a City facility, activity, or program. A Request for Service should be required prior to submitting a grievance. The City should then acknowledge, review the filing, and respond within a set number of days upon receipt. A clear 26 32 process for appeal of a Grievance decisions should be communicated if a denial is issues. Recommendation 7: Develop a consistent and centralized MEF documentation database Status: Underway Maximum extent feasible (MEF) is policy that dictates that alterations to the public right -of -way that could affect the usability of a facility must be made in an accessible manner to the maximum extent feasible. ADA Standards for Accessible Design (2010) dictates that: Each facility or part of a facility altered by, on behalf of, or for the use of a public entity in a manner that affects or could affect the usability of the facility or part of the facility shall, to the maximum extent feasible, be altered in such manner that the altered portion of the facility is readily accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities, if the alteration was commenced after January 26, 1992. The City of Tukwila should adopt a MEF documentation process and standard template for the documentation of maximum extent feasible when addressing new or altered construction. This documentation should be stored in a centralized location and be linked to the City's GIS ADA self- assessment database to ensure consistency of data. Consolidation of past MEF records into this data is also recommended to allow the City to identify if pedestrian facilities in the GIS self- assessment were subject to an MEF, and should therefore be removed from the City's list of barriers. A template example has been provided in Appendix F. Recommendation 8: Develop performance measures and processes to track removal of barriers Status: Underway The primary purpose of an ADA transition plan is to develop a plan for removal of accessibility barriers. In order to show progress towards this requirement, the City should develop a process of tracking barrier removal on a year by year basis. It is recommended that the City actively updated the GIS ADA self- assessment database developed for this plan, tracking how and when ADA barriers are removed. This data can be used to provide annual updates on progress and demonstrate to the public as well as federal regulators that the City is making progress to meet Title 11 requirements. 27 33 Recommendation 9: Begin to work on other Title II required elements such as public buildings and parks Status: Pending Title II, "protects qualified individuals with disabilities from discrimination on the basis of disability in services, programs, and activities provided by State and local government entities." and extends beyond accessibility within the public right -of -way. The City should develop a plan for meeting other Title II requirements such as removal of barriers in public buildings, programs and parks. 28 34 5 IMPLEMENTATION 5.1 APPROACH Development of an implementation plan and transition schedule included three steps once the Citywide barrier assessment was complete. First, all pedestrian facilities with an identified barrier were prioritized based on two factors, the severity of the barrier and the proximity that facility to public destinations. Next, a planning level cost estimate was developed to provide an estimate of the financial resources needed to removal all barriers. Finally, a schedule was developed based on the annual financial resources the City Council has allocated to barrier removal. The follow chapter describes these steps in more detail. 5.2 PRIORITIZATION To focus City efforts toward facilities that pose the largest barrier within the public right -of -way, an analysis of the accessibility of each pedestrian facility and its proximity to public destinations such as schools, libraries, parks, transit and city buildings was completed. The result of this analysis is a prioritized list of projects, with the highest benefit projects identified for removal first. To complete this assessment, a multi- criteria analysis was conducted to determine which facilities do not meet existing sidewalks and curb ramp standards and how. Each attribute collected in the field was compared against PROWAG requirements as outlined in Chapter 2. If the facility does not meet PROWAG criteria or is located near public destinations, points were assigned, with the number of points dependent on the relative importance or proximity. Sidewalks or curb ramps with poor PROWAG compliance and a number of proximate destinations received a high score and are prioritized for removal while PROWAG compliant ramps far from public destinations have a score of zero. Missing sidewalks or curb ramps were assigned the greatest number of points. 5.2.1 Accessibility Index Score A number of criteria were used to establish the extent to which each pedestrian facility did or did not present a barrier to accessible mobility. Table 5 -1 shows these criteria, the threshold used to identify them as a barrier, and the score used to indicate the severity of each barrier relative to each other. 29 35 Table 5 -1— Accessibility Index Score Value Accessibility Index Score Criteria Threshold Score Sidewalks Curb Ramps Missing Curb Ramps Signal Push Buttons Width < 48 inches 3 Cross Slope > 2% 2 Condition < Average 3 Vertical Discontinuity > Minor 4 Fixed Obstacles Present 6 Moveable Obstacles Present 2 Protruding Obstacles Present 3 Non - Compliant Driveways Present 2 Maximum Sidewalk (AIS) 25 Score Landing Not Present 5 Landing Width < 48 inches 3 Ramp Width < 48 inches 3 Ramp Running Slope > 8.3% 4 Ramp Running Cross Slope > 2% 2 Truncated Domes Not Present 3 Flare Slope > 10% 2 Gutter Slope > 2% 1 Lip > 1/4 Inch 2 Landing Clear Space < 4ft x 4ft 2 Landing Cross Slope > 4% 2 Maximum Curb Ramp 29 (AIS) Score All Curb Ramp Criteria 29 (Maximum) H -Style Non -APS Push Button Other Non - Standard Push Button 5 10 Facilities with a higher Accessibility Index Score (AIS) presented a large accessibility barrier and are shown in Figure 5 -1 as red dots or lines. Facilities with fewer or no barriers are shown in Figure 5 -1 as green. As shown on Figure 5 -1, sidewalks and curb ramps in the residential area bounded by 1 -5, 1 -405 and the Green River have a high concentration of barriers, where facilities along Tukwila International Boulevard or other newer roads have fairly few barriers. 30 36 sl�srl Kin9 Cogan 'nterna:ia}i i parL 09 90 e Raman Municipal AirFnrt Curb Ramp (AIS) • 21 - 29 (More Barriers) 11 -20 • 0 - 10 (Fewer Barriers) Sidewalk (AIS) 19 - 25 (More Barriers) 13 -18 7 -12 0 - 6 (Fewer Barriers) Clty Llmlts Potential Annex Area �_. Link Light Rail Parks Water Bodies 515 5atlr -Tacor a International Ai part 99 0 0.5 Miles ADA Accessibility of each Curb Ramp and Sidewalk feature. Higher score represents a larger number of barriers such as non - compliant slopes, landing widths, sidewalk widths, obstacles, etc. Accessibility Index Score (AIS) Composite DRAFT FIGURE Tukwila ADA Transition Plan transpogroup Tr 5 -1 31 37 5.2.2 Location Index Score Similarly, a number of destinations were used to identify high priority pedestrian facilities within the City. This was done by identifying public destinations such as public buildings, transit and parks and identifying pedestrian facilities within close proximity of one or more of these destinations. Pedestrian facilities within the identified proximity were assigned points based on each destination they were close to (See Table 5 -2). This measure was called the Location Index Score. Table 5 -2 — Location Index Score Value Possible Score Location Criteria Rating Criteria Schools Proximity to Schools Walk -To- School Route Parks Transit High- Capacity Transit Stops Transit Bus Stops Traffic Signal /Roundabout Public Buildings Downtown / Urban / Commercial Business Centers Community Defined Destinations Total Location Index Score (LIS) Within % -mile radius of school 5 Within safe routes to school zone 5 Within % -mile radius of park 5 Within 'A -mile of high- capacity transit 5 stop Within % -mile of transit stop Within' /8 -mile of signal or roundabout Within' /8 -mile of location Within' /4 -mile radius of Downtown, Urban and Commercial Business Center Zoning 5 5 5 5 Within % -mile of location 5 40 Figure 5 -2 below is a graphic representation of this scoring process. Darker locations indicate areas with a high concentration of pedestrian destinations while lighter areas represent areas with a low concentration of these destinations. 32 38 e Raman Municipal Prprl Curb Ramp (LIS) • 31 - 40 (Many Nearby) • 21 -30 • 11 -2D 0 - 10 (Fewer Nearby) Sidewalk (LIS) 31 - 40 (Many Nearby) 21 - 30 11 -2D 0 - 10 (Fewer Nearby) J1 City Limits Potential Annex Area Link Light Rail Parks Water Bodies Sea0e-Taco l a Interna.ional kirpprt 99 0 0.5 Miles Curb Ramp and Sidewalk features in proximity to destinations and amenities. Index Score based on Urban Zones, High Capacity Transit, Bus Stops, Parks, Schools, Community Destinations, Public Buildings. Higher score represents a greater need for accessibility. Location Index Score (LIS) Composite DRAFT FIGURE transpogroup 'r 5 -2 Tukwila ADA Transition Plan iPn ie t I t, 1F;t.;, - TukwilaADA Trans I on Pia r'GW',P;iaq, t1xD f-icur-s d lg :; -u Lu; ;;i1 IUcn s' ,.rn;:d 33 39 5.2.3 Barrier Removal Priorities By combining the Accessibility Index Score and Location Index Score together, a Composite Index Score was developed. Together, these measures prioritize barrier removal at locations where pedestrian facilities present a barrier and where pedestrians would be expected. Facilities with the highest score should be address first (36+ points) and represent facilities that present a clear physical barrier and are in high - demand areas. Facilities with lower scores should be address last (0 to 15 points), have minor barriers, and are in locations where pedestrian demand would be expected to be lower. These scores are relative, comparing one facility to the other. The ranges for medium and high priority were defined based on review of the identified barriers and assessment of the relative barrier they present. It should be noted that while some barriers are lower, they still need to be removed. Figure 5 -3 shows the sidewalk and curb ramp priority by locations in with dark red indicating the highest priority and the lowest priority barriers in green. Figure 5 -4 shows pedestrian push buttons at signalized intersection and uses the same color range. A tabular representation of this data has also been shown in Table 5 -3 below, using the same ranges. Table 5 -3 ADA Deficiencies by Type and Priority ADA Deficiency Unit Lower Medium High Highest Sidewalks Non - Compliant Sidewalk Width LF 605 209 184 61 Non - compliant sidewalk slope LF 5,529 22,040 15,608 1,882 Non - compliant driveways EA 102 505 300 26 Non - compliant vertical discontinuity LF 1,028 7,120 5,773 618 Sidewalk fixed obstacles (Trees) EA 9 69 66 1 Sidewalk fixed obstacles (Utility Poles) EA - 2 14 3 Sidewalk fixed obstacles (Fire Hydrants) EA - 5 1 - Sidewalk fixed obstacles (Mailboxes) EA - 12 11 - Curb Ramps Curb ramps without truncated domes EA 21 63 34 2 Crossings with missing curb ramps EA - - 21 44 Substandard ramp landings EA 16 128 193 57 Non - compliant ramp width or slope EA 28 171 248 57 Push Buttons Locations without APS push buttons EA 77 225 59 1 34 40 50 e Renton iyttel pal 'porl Curb Ramp (AIS +LIS) • 36+ (Higher Priority) • 26=35 16 -25 • fl - 15 (Lower Priority) Sidewalk (AIS +LIS) 36+ (Higher Priority) 26 -35 16 -25 fl - 15 (Lower Priority) ri City Limits 71 Potential Annex Area Link Light Rail Parks Water Bodies • KI r 181 0 0.5 Miles Accessibility (AIS) & Location (LIS) Combined Score FIGURE Tukwila ADA Transition Praia DRAFT Cransp© 35 41 Push Buttons (AIS+LIS) • 36+ (Higher Priority) • 26 - 35 16 - 25 ▪ - 15 (Lower Priority) rrq City Limits • ' Potential Annex Area Link Light Rail ; Parks Water Bodies 36 Accessibility & Location Combined Score (Signal Push Button) FIGURE Tukwila ADA Transition Plan DRAFT transpogroup 5-4 42 5.3 TRANSITION PLAN COST AND SCHEDULE A key requirement of an ADA Transition Plan is development of a schedule which show how long it will take the City to remove accessibility barriers. Understanding the financial resources needed to remove accessibility barriers is essential for developing such a schedule. 5.3.1 Process Unit costs were developed to address ADA barriers described in Chapter 2. The barriers include various levels of expense and are separated into cost estimates for sidewalks, curb ramps and pedestrian push button improvements. A final cost estimate was determined using information from the data inventory and calculated using current year construction costs, as shown in Appendix E. The cost estimates are meant to assist in determining a schedule for the completion of the barrier removal process as a tool to help the City plan funding for the full removal of barriers over a number of years. By funding the program substantially in the near -term (1 -3 years) it allows the City to address a number of barriers at the onset while lowering the total number of years needed to fully fund the program. 5.3.2 Cost Estimate Assumptions Planning level cost estimates were determined using data gathered during the inventory process and unit costs from the City and WSDOT. Sidewalk and curb ramp ADA deficiencies were totaled using their respective unit — linear feet for sidewalks, and number of facilities for curb ramps. To avoid overestimation of non - compliant facilities assumptions were made when necessary to address the reasonableness of the unit cost. Other factors such as contingency, design, mobilization and traffic control were added to the sidewalk and curb ramp barrier removal cost subtotal. Right -of -way and any other ROW associated costs were not captured in the cost estimation. The cost estimation worksheet should be updated as the City completes barrier removal projects, additional facilities are determined to be non - compliant, or the assumed project costs change. 5.3.3 Planning Level Cost Estimate The planning level cost estimate to remove all identified barriers is $8,057,000 (in 2016) including construction, design, mobilization, contingency and other construction related contingencies. Table 5 -4 below shows a detailed accounting of each type of barrier, how each barrier would be resolved and the associated cost. Non - compliant sidewalks represent the largest overall cost, followed by non - compliant driveways and curb ramps at roughly the same overall total cost. Table 5 -4 ADA Barrier Removal Cost Estimates 37 43 ADA Deficiency Improvement Type Total Price Sidewalks Sidewalk improvements (upgrade /reconstruct existing 6' wide sidewalk) Sidewalk improvements (upgrade /reconstruct existing 6' wide sidewalk) New driveway with sidewalk Sidewalk improvements (sidewalk grinding) Sidewalk improvements (Tree removals) Sidewalk improvements (Relocate Utility Poles) Sidewalk improvements (Relocate Fire Hydrant) Sidewalk improvements (Mailbox, Remove & Relocate) $37,039 $1,982,581 $1,118,400 $363,453 $147,900 $17,100 $15,000 $4,600 Non - Compliant Sidewalk Width Non - compliant sidewalk slope Non - compliant driveways Non - compliant vertical discontinuity Sidewalk fixed obstacles (Trees) Sidewalk fixed obstacles (Utility Poles) Sidewalk fixed obstacles (Fire Hydrants) Sidewalk fixed obstacles (Mailboxes) Subtotal $3,687,000 Curb Ramps New perpendicular curb ramp New curb ramps Curb ramp improvement (upgrade /install top landing) Curb ramp improvement (reconstruct existing) $48,000 $104,000 $78,800 $887,040 Curb ramps without truncated domes Crossings with missing curb ramps Substandard ramp landings Non - compliant ramp width or slope Subtotal $1,118,000 Push Buttons Upgrade existing traffic signal to APS $749,340 Locations without APS push buttons Subtotal $750,000 Total $5,555,000 Contingency@ 10% Design @ 12% Mobilization @8% TESC + Traffic Control @ 15% $556,000 $667,000 $445,000 $834,000 Total 2016 Dollars $8,057,000 Figure 5 -5 below separates the total barrier removal cost by category with very high and high priority projects representing a total cost of $469,000 and $2,799,000 respectively. Curb ramps represent the largest cost item for very high priority barriers. 38 44 $4,500,000 $4,000,000 $3,500,000 `6 $3,000,000 0 7 $2,500,000 o $2,000,000 $1,500,000 0 u $1,000,000 $500,000 $- Lower Medium High Highest Priority Level Push buttons • Curb ramps • Driveways • Sidewalks • Construction associated costs & contingencies Figure 5 -5 Planning Level Cost Estimate by Priority Level ar c' Facility Type 5.3.4 Schedule Based on the planning level cost estimates and an annual investment of $200,000 dollar put toward barrier removal, it will take the City approximately 40 years to remove all identified barriers. As shown in Table 5 -5 below, very high and high priority barriers would be removed in about 2 and 14 years respectively, or 16 years combined. This schedule can be accelerated if the City budgets more for barrier removal or other projects or funding sources can be leverage to remove barriers faster. Table 5 -5 Barrier Removal Duration by Priority Level Barrier Priority 39 45 Lower Medium High Highest Cost Estimate Annual Investment Transition Duration (individual/ cumulative) $935,000 $200,000 5 years/ 40 years $3,870,000 $200,000 19 years/ 35 years $2,799,000 $200,000 14 years/ 16 years $469,000 $200,000 2 years/ 2 years 39 45 6 CURRENT PRACTICES This chapter documents key pieces of information which are critical for ongoing plan implementation which are likely to change over the lifetime of the plan such as the official responsible for plan oversight or progress report on barrier removal. This section is meant to act as a "living document" which should be updated to represent current practices or information, and will thus change over time. This section is updated as of: Nov 2016 6.1 OFFICIAL RESPONSIBLE • Official Responsible - Bob Giberson, Public Works Director • Mailing Address - 6300 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188 • Phone Number - (206) 433 -0179 • Email - Bob.Giberson @TukwilaWA.gov 6.2 CURRENT GRIEVANCE PROCESS • See Appendix G 6.3 MAXIMUM EXTENT FEASIBLE DATABASE AND PROCESS • See Appendix F 6.4 APS POLICY • See Appendix H 6.5 ACCESSIBILITY OF ADA TRANSITION PLAN INFORMATION To be finalized upon finalization of plan. 6.6 BARRIER REMOVAL PERFORMANCE MONITORING The plan is currently less than a year old so it represents the most recent available data. 40 46