Welcome to Lakewood, Washington, USA

I live in a newly incorporated (1995?) area that has long been a suburb of Tacoma, Washington.

The city of Lakewood, as it is now known, recently finished building a new 55,000 square foot, four story, $10,000,000 city hall and I went to the dedication ceremonies back on November 30th.

Being in a wheelchair I tend to notice little problems with handicapped access and even have a rather complete library of laws, decisions, rules, and settlements dealing with the ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) and related federal and state items.

While the new city hall is a nice building, with it's sweeping wood architecture reflecting the Northwest, and one that the new city really needed, there are some serious problems with the brain-dead way some handicapped access (and other) items were handled - or not handled.

For example, the first area I saw at the dedication was the City Council Chambers, where public meetings are held. This meeting room has no handicapped seating nor places for those in wheelchairs to 'park' while attending. Simple errors like this one should not have been made by any architect competent to design a public building.

It was missed by the architect and his crew, by the construction contractors and their crews, by the building inspectors, and by the owners (the city). It was only officially recognized when I cornered the City Attorney at the dedication and gave him a list of access problems in his nice new building.

There are a number of other areas where the building does not meet federal and state laws and requirements (not just handicapped access, but other legal requirements, also, such as required firearms storage, etc.), and I have discussed them with the city attorney and the head of the Public Works department (he has responsibility for the building).

I've saved the best for last, though.

We all know that emergency exits - those doors with the lighted signs backed up with batteries so that they can be found in any emergency - have very strict requirements that MUST be met. There is no slack allowed for these requirements since this can be a life or death emergency with no second chances.

On the main floor, of the emergency exit doors accessible from the public spaces (I'm sure there are others that only employees will encounter), three of them have pushbutton electrical door openers for handicapped persons. These doors can also be operated manually by pushing or pulling them should the electrical openers fail.

So far, so good, right?

Oops! The front of the building is about 3 feet above ground and has a good sized, partly covered plaza "front porch" with concrete steps. No ramps, just the steps. It looks nice, and the swooping wood roof over parts of the plaza adds to the nice lines of the building.

The problem, however, is that four of the emergency exits - including one of the marked handicapped exits - exit onto this 20 foot deep plaza.

A person in a wheelchair (and many with walkers) would be trapped on that plaza, right next to the building, if they left through those 4 emergency exits - including one with several "wheelchair signs" (the world standard handicapped access logo).

The only emergency exits that will not trap the handicapped are the ones at the far ends of the building. The others are a dead end. Possibly VERY dead.

When I discussed this with the powers that be for the building they recognized this was a serious problem. This is one of those "design oversights" that wasn't picked up, and the architect, contractors and owner share in the responsibility for fixing it. Fast.

The fix won't be easy. It may require a re-design of the entire front of the building. It would have been much better to have done it right the first time.

That this was also missed by the fire, building code, and safety inspectors bothers me even more.

I'll be wandering over to our new city hall this week to see what, if anything, has been done since I was last there. This time I'll be taking a camera.

And I'll be keeping an eye on where the USABLE exits are. (BTW: The marked public emergency exits from other than the main floor dump onto that raised plaza . . . )

(These are the people who are supposed to be responsible for making others comply with the law? *SIGH* )

I'm not now nor have I ever been an architect or building contractor - I'm an electronic engineer. Why didn't the people who are supposedly competent in these areas catch these problems?

Comments? Drop me a note in my forum.

UPDATE: 2002/01/04 01:13

Well, I stopped by the new Lakewood City Hall late this afternoon to see what sort of progress they had made on the building problems, and was very disappointed to see that absolutely nothing had been done.

What I've decided to do now is to escalate this just a bit by making a tiny splash on the web.

I'm trying to get the donkey to move by building a small fire under it. Of course one could also end up with barbecued donkey if one is not cautious.

I plan to call the fire department tomorrow (they are NOT a city department, but a regional one) to see if maybe one of their fire inspectors can evaluate the building.

I also plan to contact the building inspectors tomorrow with the same intent.

I'm considering also dropping the newspaper and/or TV news folks an e-mail to see if maybe they want to get involved, but I'll probably wait 'til early next week for that.

Meantime, maybe you'd like to take a quick look at the words and pictures I'll be referring them all to?

Considering that I just put up my web page about the safety and access problems at the new Lakewood City Hall, I find it interesting that my first actual response from the city happened about five hours after they became aware of the page.

Here is the complete content of their e-mail to me:

---

X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise Internet Agent 6.0
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 13:51:38 -0800
From: "___ ______" <_______@ci.lakewood.wa.us>
Subject: Lakewood City Hall

The problem you refer to is being addressed, and all code descrepancies will be corrected in the near future.

---

Since I don't necessarily believe this I'll of course keep checking physically to verify . . .

On January 14th I sent an informal e-mail to the Lakewood City Council, Community Development, and City Clerk e-mail addresses. Here's the content of that e-mail:

This is a very informal note to you to help keep you aware of a problem
that the City Council has responsibility for.

I was just on the city's site looking for the Council schedule to find
out when it's next meeting was scheduled, and since the detailed
schedule does not show it, I assume it will be next Monday.

While I was there, however, I also looked at the minutes of the last
meeting and noticed the following statement on each page:

The Council Chambers is accessible to persons with disabilities. Equipment
is available for the hearing impaired. Persons requesting special
accommodations or language interpreters should contact the City ClerkÕs
Office, 589-2489, as soon as possible in advance of the Council meeting so
that an attempt to provide the special accommodations can be made.

Since what I have previously brought to the attention of the city has
to deal with access at the new City Hall, including the Council
Chambers, I felt that I should contact you directly.

As the easiest way for you to get a basic idea of the problems I brought
to the city's attention, here is a link to a site I have established on-
line:

http://home.earthlink.net/~zip98498/

Thank you very much for your time and attention, and may all of
Lakewood have a good year!

I have not yet received any acknowledgement or reply to this e-mail from any of the recipients.

I also finally managed to contact a Deputy Chief of the fire department, and he was going to be in the City Hall today for other reasons, but he promised to check on the emergency exit problems I brought up, and get back to me today about what he found. Considering the time, I doubt this is going to happen . . .

Well, I found out early this morning that the e-mails I sent to the City of Lakewood did not reach the people addressed. Their e-mail system is broken, and has been for at least several days. One would think that the City would get it fixed immediately, or at the very least, if they couldn't, they would put up a notice that it was not working somewhere on their site . .

While confirming the notice I had received from my mailer daemon that the City of Lakewood mail system was broken and it had not been able to deliver my e-mail for over 48 hours despite repeated tries, I talked with a nice young lady who suggested I print out my e-mail and FAX it.

As I was FAXing myprinted out e-mail to the City, it suddenly struck me just how bizarre a thing that was. I was FAXing an E-MAIL? Sheesh! (To make it even more interesting: I called the young lady back to confirm that my FAX had been received, and it had not. The City's machine showed that it had received the fax from my machine in good condition, but it had not printed . . . (By now I'm actually laughing.)

I resent the FAX of my e-mail *chuckle* and once again the City machine acknowledged receiving it OK *chuckle* and this time the nice young lady called me back to let me know that it had actually printed. *chuckle* She told me she would get it to the people addressed on the FAXed e-mail, *chuckle* and I thanked her and wished her a good day.

Part of the reason for that e-mail back on the 14th was to give the City a "heads up" so that they could either respond a bit better or be ready if I finally ran out of patience and dropped a note to any of the local newsrooms.

As it turns out, *chuckle* just minutes before my system informed me that the City's e-mail had been broken for days, I sent a brief e-mail to just one of the local TV stations referring them to the site I had set up about the problem, and leaving it up to them to determine if it was anything they wanted to pursue.

I haven't checked to see who is hitting the site right now, but since I sent the FAX there have been 5 hits to the page I referenced in the FAXed e-mail.

Oh! I still haven't heard back from the fire inspector . . .

A little earlier I got a response to the e-mail I sent to the Lakewood City Council, City Clerk, and Development folks. That means two things: 1) They fixed their e-mail system, and 2) someone actually read my e-mail.

This response was from the City Clerk and responded to the portion of my e-mail where I indicated that the Council meeting schedule was not on line when I checked. It appears she said that it sometimes doesn't get there until the day of the Council meeting. There was no comment on the remainder of my e-mail, which is probably appropriate from the City Clerk.

Even so, I'm a bit tired of the lack of reasonable response from just about everyone involved. I realize that I am only one single person out here in their "public," but I never the less feel that I have brought to their attention a legitimate safety issue that requires more than a pat on the head and a "We'll get to it" response. Even if they just put huge, ugly, embarrassing, signs in front of the exits that say "No Handicapped Access!" with directional arrows pointing the way to where the handicapped can get out until they fix the problem, something needs to be done. Now.

In light of that, and the fact that one tiny voice is often impossible to hear, I have e-mailed not only the city, the fire department, and a local network TV station, but also a local newspaper and a national magazine that is interested in these sorts of problems. Even if my voice cannot be heard, and even if none of those media choose to present anything to the public, I am hoping that if any of those media start asking questions activity will suddenly start at the City Hall. This really is a life safety problem and something needs to be done now, even if it is not the final answer.

I suppose there is the possible consideration that the city does not have to respond to nor answer to me. Maybe I'm just getting old, but I seem to recall from my schooling nearly half a century ago that they worked for us, not the reverse. I'm usually a very patient person, and quite understanding of the difficulties in getting things done in a bureaucracy (I spent 25 years in the 'phone company, mostly as an engineering manager), but safety items are a different kettle of fish entirely.

I look forward to getting answers to the safety concerns I have.

I put a poll question on IAM about publishing responses from the city on my pages. IAMer's, please take the time to mark your opinion.

Thanks!

(I still have heard nothing from the Fire Inspectors.)

Earlier today I received a response from the City Manager of Lakewood responding to some of the items I have on this web site about their new City Hall. Following are excerpts (in RED) from that letter, and my comments.

The City is aware of the issues outlined by you in your web site.

I would hope so, since I brought them up to the City Attorney at the building dedication in November, and they are still there.

The required handrails for the outside stairs are being fabricated and will be installed.

My concern here is that the handrails need to be installed along the entire length of the exterior steps, with no more than 5 foot spacing between handrails. This is because the UFC (NFPA's Universal Fire Code) views the steps as part of an egress route. (There are four emergency exits that route to these steps.) I will be watching with interest to see what is finally installed.

. . . the code requires that a physically challenged person be able to exit the building from a signed exit location to an accessible route of travel. This requirement is not met along the south side of the building (i.e. the central entrance and the south entrance on the west end). We are in the process of designing a ramp between the south entrance and the west entrance ramp to bring the building exiting into ADA compliance.

I have several concerns here. The first is that only two of the four emergency exits on the south side of the building are mentioned. I will need to verify the marking status of the stairwell doors on the main floor. If they are indeed marked as exits on that floor, they, too, need to be included in the plan.

Secondly, until that is accomplished, I hope some very obvious signage is placed at those exits not accessible to the mobility impaired warning them away and directing them to exits they can use on the other sides of the building. This is especially important since there is no way to see the step hazard from inside.

Third, it needs to be assured that the mobility impaired are directed without error, even in a panic situation, to the accessible route. Just having a ramp in place does not insure that someone will not be trapped on the plaza by just proceeding straight away from the building.

Last, connecting the planned new ramp to the existing ramp without exceeding the slope limits of the UFC or ADAAG (Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines) may be very difficult because of the change of direction.

We have to do some modifications to the Council Chambers seating to bring it into compliance with ADA requirements. We are waiting for additional furnishings and then will be able to determine how we can reasonably add an additional row of fixed and wheelchair seating on the front of the southerly seating section.

I look forward to changes to allow for wheelchair and companion seating. I hope other changes to allow transfer seats for those who would rather not remain in their wheelchairs are also planned.

It is a shame that these obvious items were not adequately addresses by the architect, especially since they are not new and have been requirements for publicly accessed areas for years. If these items had been caught during design, or even construction, the changes would have been simple and inexpensive. Trying to correct a building, completed and open to the public, to comply with the law is much more expensive and disruptive.

I assume that the legislative body addressed in RCW 9.41.300 is also the City Council. I hope since the life safety and ADA concerns were paramount in Scott's letter that he felt that 9.41 compliance was best left to another letter.

Overall having an official response from the city showing that they agree there are problems, and promising to correct them is nice. My hope now is that all of the problems are recognized, and that the corrections will be done right. (I hope they hold the architect's feet to the fire and force him to correct his errors.)

I also asked the City Manager's office for the name and contact information for the required ADA Coordinator for the city. I am hoping for a reply soon. I have been through the city's web site and the city bulletins I have on hand and do not see their ADA Coordinator listed . . .

(I still have heard nothing from the Fire Inspectors.)