REPORT-SF-941XX

12/02/2004
Subj: Re: Complaint - Various Violations on Hayes Street (From Stanyan, East) and various other sites in that neighborhood
Date: 12/2/2004
From: rmskaff@comcast.net
To: Grace.Moore@sfdpw.org,Board.of.Supervisors@sfgov.org, michelle_adams@dot.ca.gov, michael.winter@fta.dot.gov

12/02/04

Mr. Kevin Jensen
ADA/Disability Access Coordinator
San Francisco Department of Public Works
30 Van Ness Avenue, 5th Floor
San Francisco, Ca. 94103

Mr. Jensen,

Once again, I am filing a public right-of-way complaint with you regarding
non-complying construction in the public right-of-way. In this case, the
violation is once again created by P.G.&E undergrounding crews. This has
been an issue with P.G.&E. for a number of years and throughout the City.

I am unwilling to continue spending my time attempting to protect my rights
and those of others in the disability community by acting as an enforcement
individual for the City because the City of San Francisco and the Department
of Public Works is unwilling or unable to enforce it's own Orders, in this
case, Order No. 167,840, titled guidelines pertaining to the placement of
barricades at construction sites. You must recognize that the City's lack
of enforcement of that Order doesn't even take into account the fact that
the City of San Francisco is not in compliance with state and federal
codes/regulations that require the City and it's department responsible for
the public sidewalks to assure that the public right-of-way is both safe and
accessible for the public to use, including those of us with disabilities.

If there isn't a dramatic and immediate change in the way the City takes
it's responsibilities with regard to the enforcement of access
codes/regulations and local City Orders to protect the rights of persons
with disabilities in the public right-of-way, I will take the only other
option apparently available to me and take legal action against the City for
it's pattern and practice of discriminating against my rights to safe and
functional access to the public sidewalks under the City's control.

Within the next thirty days, I expect a written response indicating what the
City proposes to do to assure that the kind of violations shown in the
attached photos don't continue to occur.

Thank you for your help with this matter.

Richard Skaff
Email: rmskaff@comcast.net
----- Original Message -----
From: "Santos, Edelmira" Edelmira.Santos@sfdpw.org
To: "Chono, Cynthia" Cynthia.Chono@sfdpw.org, rmskaff@comcast.net
Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2004
Subject: Complaint - Various Violations @ Hayes Street (From Stanyan) -
Richard Skaff


Dear Ms. Chono/Ms. Moore:

May we refer to you the following complaint phoned in today by Mr. Richard
Skaff for consideration and response? Mr. Skaff claimed that there are PG&E
crews working on both sides along Hayes Street, from Stanyan going East. He
observed that the utility company's crews are repeatedly in violations of
the DPW (Order No. 167,840) Guidelines pertaining to the placement of
barricades at construction sites, & the federal/state codes as well. In
above-mentioned location, he noted that -

* There are vehicles parked on the sidewalk blocking pedestrian's path of
travel.
* The excavated areas are covered with plywood without cutback.
* Some sections of the sidewalk excavated areas are improperly barricaded
or no barricade at all.
* There are also open trenches.
* A safety/tripping hazard not only for persons who are blind or visually
impaired but also for other pedestrians as well.

The Disability Access Coordinator's (DAC) Office requests that -
* An inspector visits the site to investigate, assess the condition and take
appropriate action, if necessary.
* The Disability Access Coordinator be informed of any noted violations and
what measures DPW takes to address them.
* What actions the utility's forces or their contractors have taken to
correct current violations and prevent future violations.

Please respond ASAP, so we may inform the complainant of our findings and
actions taken before December 31.

Thank you for your prompt attention to this request.
Emy C. Santos
DPW Disability Access Coordinator's Office
Tel. No. (415) 558-4526
Email Address: Edelmira.Santos@sfdpw.org

REPORT-CalTrans-Ca

12/02/2004
Subj: Cal Trans Disability Access Violations - Various Locations
Date: 12/2/2004
From: rmskaff@comcast.net
To: michael.winter@fta.dot.gov,Brenda.Armstead@fhwa.dot.gov, frederickd.isler@fhwa.dot.gov, michelle.adams@dot.ca.gov,
CC: Alberto.Gonzalez@doj.ca.gov, Peter.Siggins@GOV.CA.GOV

12/02/04

Ms. Michelle Adams
ADA Statewide Coordinator
California Department of Transportation
Sacramento, Ca.

SUBJECT: FORMAL COMPLAINT - VARIOUS LOCATIONS - CAL TRANS FACILITIES

Ms. Adams,

I have attached a formal access complaint originally sent to you on 11/23/04. I look forward to an immediate response with correction dates and a listing of the access violations I have brought to your attention and how they will corrected. I also expect that other previously sent access complaints will finally be responded to and resolved, including the meeting locations that I have been to throughout the State used by the Cal Trans Traffic Control Device Committee which did not have the required physical or program access. It is apparent to me, from Cal Trans projects I have encountered throughout the State, that there is obviously no oversight and enforcement to assure compliance with state and federal access codes/regulations, and no quality assurance program to keep project management aware of their staff's quality of work.

It is quite obvious that Cal Trans has not made a commitment to access for persons with disabilities within their programs and facilities. As part of my complaint, please provide me with a flow chart of where your office sits within the Cal Trans administration and what authority and staffing you have. Based on the size of the Cal Trans agency, unless you, as the ADA/Disability Access Coordinator, have the Director's authority and staff to support your efforts, physical and program access violations like the ones I have filed with you, will not be resolved, and Cal Trans will continue to respond to their responsibilities in this area reactively instead of proactively. I can assure you that this will eventually lead to legal action against Cal Trans by the disability community as the only way we can assure our civil rights within Cal Trans programs and facilities.

As part of this complaint, I am also sending copies to Mr. Richard Conrad, the Acting State Architect, because that office approved the plans for at least the Brower Vista Point project. Based on our site review together (you and other Cal Trans staff and a representative from the State Architect's Office), it was obvious that the plan review left much to be desired with regard to access requirements. I look forward to a timely response from DSA.

Richard Skaff
Email: rmskaff@comcast.net
________________________________________
11/23/04

Ms. Michelle Adams
ADA Statewide Coordinator
Department of Transportation

Ms. Adams,

Although I appreciate your efforts to assure that the violations at Brower's
Vista Point are resolved, I am very concerned that Cal Trans has been aware
of the state and federal access code/regulatory violations since 2003 when I
first filed my complaint. The time and effort it has taken me personally to
get Cal Trans and the State Architect's Office to respond is completely
unacceptable.

REPORT-N-949XX

12/01/2004
Subj: Re: Accessibility Complaint
Date: 12/1/2004
From: rmskaff@comcast.net
To: raveriet@ci.novato.ca.us, karen.panian@target.com

12/1/04

Mr. Averiette
Chief Building Official
City of Novato

Mr. Averiette,

I'm so please to read that you now recognize that there are, in fact, access code violations in the Target store in the Vintage Oaks Shopping Center. I didn't make a list the last time I visited the store, but know that the items you have listed are, at the very minimum, existing violations.

My question to you at this point is why you are asking the store to provide you with a time frame for the correction of the violations? I have always understood that it was the responsibility of the building official to make that decision, especially when we have State regulations that require correction of access violations within 90 days of the determination that access code violations exist.

In one of my most recent emails, I also raised the question about the need for detectable warning materials (truncated domes) at the entrance sidewalk area to Target. I have never received a response from you about that. Didn't Target modify the sidewalk when the building remodel was done in the last year or two? Is the store responsible or the shopping center owner?



----- Original Message -----
From: Ron Averiette
To: karen.panian@target.com
Cc: rmskaff@comcast.net ; ddenaut@cbre.com ; Robert Geno
Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 1:07 PM
Subject: Accessibility Complaint

Ms. Karen Panian

Hope you had a nice holiday. As a follow up to our phone conversation, a review of the interior of the Targe store at the Vintage Oaks Shopping Center in Novato, CA was completed and the following violations of the California Building Code (CBC) were observed:

1. Checkstands: The required three accessible checkstands ( regular check stands exceed nine so three are required to be accessible) do not have required symbol and signage, including the wording "This checkstand to be open at all times for customers with disabilities" (Section 1110B1.3 CBC) This would include the express or quick checkstand.

2. In the mens restroom, the flush handle on the accessible water closet in the bathroom is not on the wide side of the toilet. (Section 1115B.2.1.2 CBC) Please note the womens restroom was not checked due to the volume of customers at the time of the inspection, so there may be a similar violation in the women's accessible stall.

3. The bottom edge of the mirror (not frame) on the wall in the men's restroom above the accessible lavatory fixture, exceeds the maximum height of 40 inches from the floor. (Section 1115B.9.1 CBC) See note above regarding the women's restroom.

4. The signage on both restrooms doors do not meet code requirements of a triangle sign for the men's and a circle for the women's (Section 1115B.5 CBC) and the required wall signs on the latch side of the doors (Section 1117B.5.7 CBC)

5. The color of the symbol on the existing signs is not white on blue (blue to be equal to Color No. 15090 in Federal Standard 595b) and I can not locate in our records a request by Target to have the white on red approved for use. (Section 1117B.5.8.1.1 CBC)
If you wish to use the white on red for purposes of maintaining the white and red decor, please make a formal request so we may review and approve your request under the exception portion of the above code section and have such approval in both our records.


Please provide a reasonable time frame on having the above violations corrected,but in no case later than 90 days from todays date so we can be in compliance with California Govenment Code Section 4452.

If you have any questions please contact me by email or at 415 897-4335.

Thank you
Ron Averiette
Chief Building Official
City of Novato