Laserfiche WebLink
requirements. H~LCO supports the intent and purpose of ADA; however, we believe <br /> that 13111 225 as currently drafted will result in unmerited hardship on utilities that were <br /> not responsible for the design and construction of non-ADA compliant County <br /> roadways. The utilities would be required to bring those roadways up to ADA standards <br /> as proposed in Section 22-4.4(h) merely because the utilities perform construction work <br /> in a County street to maintain service to the community. <br /> for example, in order to meet County standards, a utility pole must be located <br /> one and a half to two feet from the curb. However, some of the older County sidewalks <br /> may be only five feet wide, which might not leave enough room for the utility pole whale <br /> still complying with ADA wheelchair access requirements. If a utility needed to dig up <br /> the sidewalk in order to repair a pole, Section 22-4.4(h) could require the entire line to <br /> be relocated in order to widen the sidewalk to meet ADA standards. Such a result <br /> would overwhelm any normal maintenance and repair project and would unfairly shift <br /> the burden of ADA compliance to the utilities in the design and construction of County <br /> roadways. <br /> H~LCO already pays a franchise fee to the County for the right to place its <br /> facilities in the public right of way and constructs its facilities in accordance with County <br /> requirements. The cost-shifting proposed by Sill 225, Draft 5, would unfairly place an <br /> additional burden on H~LCO's customers. <br /> C®NCLIJSI®N <br /> HIELC® respectfully requests that this bill be passed with the deletion of <br /> <br /> the second sentence of Section 22-4.4, subsection (h). Thank you for the opportunity to <br /> <br /> submit testimony on this matter. <br /> _ _ _ <br /> <br />