NW 10th and 235

[metro]

Here's another one for Steve; was getting off at NW 10th exit from 235 southbound and noticed on the NE corner, they recently installed the new handicap ramp on the sidewalk vut put the light pole directly in the middle of the ramp, no way a person in a wheelchair could get up the ramp. Whoever is in charge of this stuff needs some quality control.

[king183]

This is unbelievable. Seriously, guys, how does this get by a city planner, engineer, or designer? I truly want to know who looks at that and thinks it's a good idea.

[CuatrodeMayo]

It looks like there is 3ft on the street side of the pole. If so, that is passable.

[metro]

Cuatro, I'll try to snap a picture straight on from the other direction. Either way it's inexcusable and poor oversight. If we're spending millions on all these new sidewalks and ADA compliance, we need some quality control, it just looks stupid if nothing else.

[jn1780]

"There's no room for a ramp there without moving the stoplight or control box, but what the hell lets put a ramp there anyway".

This is probably what they were thinking. Now that people are noticing the obvious blunder, the city will now have to fork over more money to move the stoplight and rebuild that part of the sidewalk.

[BoulderSooner]

if it meets ada standards .. which i'm sure it does .. then i don't see a big problem .. does it look great maybe not but the money to move that light poll doesn't come out of thin air

[ZYX2]

This is just pathetic. Even if it is passable, a person in a wheelchair would have to get dangerously close to the road to get around it.

[king183]

Boulder, you're correct that the money doesn't come out of thin air, which is why the city should have done it correctly in the first place.

Also, compliance with ADA isn't enough, at least in my opinion. Not only should we comply with the ADA, but we should foster a good pedestrian experience downtown, especially in the way we build our sidewalks. By placing a light pole directly in the middle of the sidewalk, they failed on the latter idea.

[BDP]

Boulder, you're correct that the money doesn't come out of thin air, which is why the city should have done it correctly in the first place.

Yep. And how do we get them to do it right next time? I think our only option is to make them fix it this time.

[Nuclear_2525]

Are you saying that ADA rules are a guideline and have no legal merit? I am nearly 100% positive you can get sued for not complying with ADA standards in modern construction. Just ask the local school districts.

[kevinpate]

It does look vary ignernt, but it also appears to be passable, and if it is, there is no functional problem to overcome.

[metro]

It does look vary ignernt, but it also appears to be passable, and if it is, there is no functional problem to overcome.

passable for who, a smaller person in a wheelchair, or one of the many overweight people around town that you see going down the middle of the STREET in a motorized scooter, such as a Hoveround? In addition to the bulkier scooter, the person themselves stick out a good 6 inches or more on both sides. As someone else said, the design of this was an afterthought, and flat out embarrasing to OKC's image.

[Spartan]

One word: Wow.

if it meets ada standards .. which i'm sure it does .. then i don't see a big problem .. does it look great maybe not but the money to move that light poll doesn't come out of thin air

Well yeah, that's where we are now, but that light pole was just put there... ? This is an accomplishment in stupidity.

[kevinpate]

passable for who, a smaller person in a wheelchair, or one of the many overweight people around town that you see going down the middle of the STREET in a motorized scooter, such as a Hoveround? In addition to the bulkier scooter, the person themselves stick out a good 6 inches or more on both sides. As someone else said, the design of this was an afterthought, and flat out embarrasing to OKC's image.

You're far more embarrassed than the silliness of it all would warrant, at least in my opinion, but hey, knock yourself out.
as for the Q of who ... the latter. Though we've never met, I'm reasonable confident I'm a bit better versed in the space requirements for large folk and their near magical motorized contraptions.

However, if you're back near that corner soon and are so inclined, slap a tape measure down and click off some shots so we're working with specific distances. I have no issue against revising my perceptions based on hard data.

[OKCMallen]

You guys make lots of assumptions. It's entirely possible that it needed to be in the middle of the sidewalk due to wiring, not just because you're smarter than everyone.

[Reno and Walker]

Looking to but a investment property near 200 block of NE 14 . whats you think, used to be soooo scary over there does it have a chance of coming back

[Larry OKC]

Some of you are asking for too much. You have sidewalks. You have ramps. You want them to to usable too? LOL LOL LOL

[Spartan]

You guys make lots of assumptions. It's entirely possible that it needed to be in the middle of the sidewalk due to wiring, not just because you're smarter than everyone.

Uhhh...

[metro]

Looking to but a investment property near 200 block of NE 14 . whats you think, used to be soooo scary over there does it have a chance of coming back

The HSC are has a ton of cheap, nice historical houses, I can't figure out why this area hasn't come back yet, I guess because it has east in the address

[metro]

Per request, I went out there today with a tape measure. 46" clearance on the north side of the pole, 50" on the south of it. I don't care what anyone says, it's a tight fit for someone in a wheelchair or motorized scooter. I'm a tall, athletic guy and just walking on one side was close enough, not to mention do we want to make people in a wheelchair have to barely squeeze through and hit it at just the right angle. Stupid IMO.

Steve, feel free to post these on your blog or send to the city, just give me credit for the photos (although bad quality).

[CuatrodeMayo]

It meets both the spirit and letter of the law by quite a bit (ADA requires 36" clear). The most elegant solution? No. But it works.

[okclee]

Metro,,,nice work with the camera, especially as of late.

If I were in a wheelchair or not, there is much more to be concerned about than this light pole being in the center of the sidewalk. Look at all of the other adjoining sidewalks here, and I am not seeing a crossing signal here either.

We really have a pathetic sidewalk system unless you are at NW 164 & Western or Memorial and Penn.

Why is it that the places that need sidewalks and crosswalk the most have the least, and the areas that use them the least have the most?

[metro]

You're right. Not only that, I wish I would have taken a pic of the NW corner. They made it facing south, but no entry/ramp facing the NE ramp (the one in the picture). It's pathetic the way there is no oversight to these new ramps. I'm ecstatic that we're doing it, just wish their was better oversight. Alot of the ramps don't make sense and I've not seen ramps built elsewhere the way we are doing some of them (with the massive curbs, weird angles, etc.).

[Spartan]

I'm a tall, athletic guy

[kevinpate]

Thank you for taking the time metro.
FWIW, I do agree it's possible for a pathway to be both ada compliant AND still look weird.
This is indeed one of those times.