Genesyxx Member Username: Genesyxx
Post Number: 532 Registered: 02-2004 Posted From: 71.159.22.7
| Posted on Friday, June 30, 2006 - 9:03 am: | |
http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs .dll/article?AID=2006606300324 |
Itsjeff
Member Username: Itsjeff
Post Number: 6235 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 208.27.111.125
| Posted on Friday, June 30, 2006 - 9:14 am: | |
The headline is actually: Detroit could pay millions to fix curbs |
Jt1 Member Username: Jt1
Post Number: 7531 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 198.208.251.24
| Posted on Friday, June 30, 2006 - 10:07 am: | |
I wonder why these same lawyers aren't going after all older suburbs that are missing or lacking ramps. How do all of areas with no sidewalks hold up for ADA. |
Dabirch Member Username: Dabirch
Post Number: 1632 Registered: 06-2004 Posted From: 208.44.117.10
| Posted on Friday, June 30, 2006 - 10:12 am: | |
I thought you were retired? |
Jt1 Member Username: Jt1
Post Number: 7533 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 198.208.251.24
| Posted on Friday, June 30, 2006 - 10:13 am: | |
I know - Slow day at the office so today will be an exception for awhile |
Dabirch Member Username: Dabirch
Post Number: 1633 Registered: 06-2004 Posted From: 208.44.117.10
| Posted on Friday, June 30, 2006 - 10:15 am: | |
That's what I said when I started smoking crack again... |
Fnemecek
Member Username: Fnemecek
Post Number: 1714 Registered: 12-2004 Posted From: 68.255.243.244
| Posted on Friday, June 30, 2006 - 10:19 am: | |
quote:I wonder why these same lawyers aren't going after all older suburbs that are missing or lacking ramps.
The older suburbs have better lawyers to defend themselves. |
Burnsie Member Username: Burnsie
Post Number: 499 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 35.12.22.193
| Posted on Friday, June 30, 2006 - 10:39 am: | |
"I wonder why these same lawyers aren't going after all older suburbs that are missing or lacking ramps." First of all, the groups representing the people with disabilities have instigated this, and they hired lawyers to represent them. The lawyers represent people with valid concerns who have to deal with the curb problems on a daily basis. You make it sound as if the lawyers were sitting around a room one day and just decided to go after Detroit, all by themselves. The reason that the groups may have a better case against Detroit is that it made the curb cuts, but IGNORED the proper specifications. It would be eaiser for a suburb without any sidewalks at all to say that it didn't have the money to install them (whether that's true or not) or say that when they're installed, they'll be done correctly. |
Baltgar Member Username: Baltgar
Post Number: 8 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 67.38.83.5
| Posted on Friday, June 30, 2006 - 11:04 am: | |
I believe Burnsie is on the right track. I think the groups are thinking of suing the COD because they did not follow ADA compliance standards when rehabilitating sidewalks. Pre-existing sidewalks are grandfathered and are not require to follow ADA compliance unless they are rehabilitated. Much like if you improve you house you have to follow current building codes when you have a building permit. |
Jt1 Member Username: Jt1
Post Number: 7534 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 198.208.251.24
| Posted on Friday, June 30, 2006 - 11:47 am: | |
That sounds fair. |
Ray1936 Member Username: Ray1936
Post Number: 666 Registered: 01-2005 Posted From: 207.200.116.139
| Posted on Friday, June 30, 2006 - 12:51 pm: | |
As Shakespeare wrote, "First thing, let's kill all the lawyers." |
Danny Member Username: Danny
Post Number: 4476 Registered: 02-2004 Posted From: 141.217.84.77
| Posted on Friday, June 30, 2006 - 12:53 pm: | |
HAH!! So soon as the Buget proposal take effect on July 1st. They city won't have any more money left for new sidewalks. |
Genesyxx Member Username: Genesyxx
Post Number: 533 Registered: 02-2004 Posted From: 71.159.22.7
| Posted on Friday, June 30, 2006 - 1:31 pm: | |
Yeah, MAY but it's looking more like a reality. The story says that they've done this in many other cities before and have always settled out of court. Knowing Detroit's history, it'll be the same deal here. |
Morena Member Username: Morena
Post Number: 433 Registered: 08-2004 Posted From: 216.45.2.138
| Posted on Friday, June 30, 2006 - 1:45 pm: | |
Detroit should fix all sidewalks and curbs - period! It helps improve our quality of life. And, it should be done by private concrete companies, not city workers. How much of our tax dollars goes towards this area? How much does the City receive from the state for such purposes (I know we get money from the state for roads)? If the City doesn't collect enough tax dollars for such repair/replacement projects, charge a fee similar to garbage collection proposal. Then, hold KK accountable. |
Fishtoes2000 Member Username: Fishtoes2000
Post Number: 111 Registered: 06-2005 Posted From: 69.14.26.135
| Posted on Friday, June 30, 2006 - 2:08 pm: | |
Detroit receives state road funding via Act 51, of which no less than 1% must be spent on non-motorized transportation such as sidewalks. Unfortunately I do not know how much money this is for Detroit, nor whether the 1% is being properly spent. While Act 51 communities are required to report on their spending, MDOT does not audit the process. Royal Oak has a very active sidewalk replacement/completion program. In most cases, sidewalk repairs are billed to the adjacent property owner. |
Bratt Member Username: Bratt
Post Number: 409 Registered: 01-2004 Posted From: 12.172.207.3
| Posted on Friday, June 30, 2006 - 2:48 pm: | |
Oh no, does that mean we would have a new sidewalk fee? Oh hell.... |
Itsjeff
Member Username: Itsjeff
Post Number: 6245 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 208.27.111.125
| Posted on Friday, June 30, 2006 - 2:49 pm: | |
Bratt! Where you been? |
Motorcitymayor2026 Member Username: Motorcitymayor2026
Post Number: 957 Registered: 10-2005 Posted From: 24.247.31.15
| Posted on Friday, June 30, 2006 - 3:44 pm: | |
^ Bratt's been compaining about the new trash fee |
Bvos Member Username: Bvos
Post Number: 1637 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 75.10.21.159
| Posted on Friday, June 30, 2006 - 10:33 pm: | |
All sidewalks and ramps installed after 1992 around the country are supposed to be ADA compliant. The CoD hasn't followed the rules at all. I live on a corner and one sidewalk has a correct sidewalk ramp, the other sidewalk does not. The sidewalks were replaced in 1998. The bottom line is that the CoD screwed up big time, as usual. There are countless other areas, both downtown and in neighborhoods, where they've done the same thing. This is no-brainer stuff for landscape architects, civil engineers and contractors. This is a big issue for folks in wheelchairs as well as a safety/convenience issue for people pushing strollers. The same group has sued AA, Ypsilanti and a few other cities for doing the same thing. Bottom line is that the CoD is wrong and they need to fix it ASAP. And they won't be able to assess property owners since the city screwed up. |
Detroitplanner Member Username: Detroitplanner
Post Number: 3 Registered: 04-2006 Posted From: 152.163.100.8
| Posted on Monday, July 03, 2006 - 11:35 am: | |
Detroit is not getting singled out. These folks have been all over the United States looking at these issues in different cities. If you think Detroit has it bad, look at some of the cities with rougher topography issues. Detroit has been putting in these ramps since the early 1908's. The problem is much of Detroit's infrastructure is much older than that, and these are done on an as needed basis. In addition, changes may have occured since placement to the level of the roadway. I spent this weekend pushing my mother around Downtown Chicago (Went to Taste of Chicago as a whole family) in a Wheelchair. These issues are valid; some areas are a breeze to get through, others the slightest variation can mean the difference in slowing down pedextrian traffic for a whole slew trying to cross the street at once. To those who think that providing people in wheelchairs the same level of access as others is an un-needed expense, I say shame on you. This is a needed goal. Major problems with achieving this goal is the city has been short of funds to implement the sidewalk program; I know I am in need of getting a couple of square replaced in front of my house and have contacted the DPW about the program and have not been given a satasfactory answer about when they will get around to my neighborhood (I've owned the home for 13 years). Secondly, Act 51 was mentioned. There is no provision for every agency that recieves Act 51 revenues to spend one percent on sidewalks (SMART recieves these dollars but does not have sidewalks). The funds can be (and are) used for widening shoulders to provide safer bicycle conditions in rural areas, and even could be used for things such as the Riverwalk or Campus Martius and count for pedestrian facilities. |