Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0580.003 2000-2002 N LENINGRAD ELARIONOFF a~!s~,°`•.~q, Phone: (808) 961-8265 Council Member ~ ~ ~ ll~i~;' Fax: (808) 961-8912 . ~ r 1 ,Tt'oR'e+a:N COUNTY COUNCIL ~ ~ ~ County of Hawai 'i Hawai 'i County Building 25 Aupuni Street Hilo, Hawaii 96720 April 17, 2002 The Honorable Harry Kim Mayor County of Hawaii 25 Aupuni Street Hilo, HI 96720 Dear Mayor Kim: RE: Bill No. 205 Regarding Streets and Sidewalks I am transmitting testimony dated April 17, 2002, from Clyde Nagata, Manager, Engineering Department, Hawaii Electric Light Company (HELLO) and Paul Oshiro, Director, Governmental Affairs, Verizon Hawaii, who have taken the time to submit written concerns about Bill No. 205 relating to Street and Sidewalks. Please review and comment on Mr. Nagata's and Mr. Oshiro's proposed amendments to Bill No. 205. Please be aware that Verizon and HELLO submitted similar testimony before the County Council for Bill No. 225. In a memorandum dated February 28, 2002, Environmental Management Director Galen Kuba explained that "Section 4.1.6(j) of the ADA guidelines recognizes that strict compliance may not be technically feasible for existing buildings and facilities. For these cases an exception is made where accessibility shall be provided to the maximum extent feasible. A form (DCAB-FAU-1) has been developed by the Disability and Communication Access Board to review and document when an improvement is deemed to be `technically infeasible.' Both utilities are aware of this procedure. Further, because this process adequately addresses the concerns raised by both companies no amendment is necessary." I believe the Council chose not to include Verizon and HELCO's proposed language because it agreed with Mr. Kuba's conclusion. ~snr~. ~Ta„~„ ~'lte No. Rif. `lao Etef. Date ~ ~ If you find their concerns valid, I would appreciate a transmittal of Draft 2 to the Council incorporating new language in time for the bill's consideration on second and final reading on May 1, 2002. Thank you again for your prompt attention. Sincerely, ~ 'w~~ ~ ~-jl.~.-•-y'l Lenin ad Elano~off \ Council Member Att. cc: Chair Arakaki and Council Members (w/ Kuba's memo) Andrew Levin, Executive Assistant and Disabilities Coordinator (w/ att) Dennis Lee, Director of Public Works (w/ att) Galen Kuba, Director of Environmental Management (w/ att) 2 ~`ESTIIt41ONY ®1= CLYDE NAGATA MANAGER, ENGINEE121NG D~~PAI~TI~IENT HAlIV~,II ELECTRIC LIGFtT COMPANY ' r, - SILL 205 AN ORDINANCE AMEN®ING CHAPTER 22, OE THE HAVNAI'I C®IJNTY C®®~ 1983 (1995 EDITION), ~iELATING TO STREETS ANt?r SIDEWALKS APRIL 17, 2002 Chair Arakaki and Members of the Hawaii County Council: I am Clyde Nagata, manager of the engineering department at Hawaii Electric Light Company ("HELLO"), submitting testimony on behalf of HELLO on dill 205, "AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 22, OF THE HAWAII COUNTY CODE 1 J83, RELATING TO STREETS AND SIDEWALKS." SUMMARY HELLO supports the intent of this bill to regulate construction within County streets in order to provide for the safety and orderly movement of pedestrians and vehicular traffic. HELLO believes, however, that the provisions of subsection (h) in Section 22-4.4. Construction permits; conditions need to be clarified. As currently drafted, the requirements of subsection (h) are so broad that they could overwhelm an applicant's entire project. That subsection requires the construction of new curb-cuts for persons with disabilities, accessible driveways or other improvements such that all repair, restoration or replacement work comply with the current requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act regardless of existing conditions. Thus, a simple pole- change out project could roquire a utility not only to replace the pole, but if that pole happens to be on a street without sidewalks that provide sufficient room for passage of a s;~heelchair, then the utility might need to widen the sidewalk, change the grade of the sidewalk, add curb-cuts, and change the grade of the street. Clearly there is not a rational relationship between the work proposed by the utility and the scope and cost of the work that could be required by achieve ADA compliance. Accordingly, ~RSLCO proposes that discretion be vested with the Director, Public Works to work with the utility in order to achieve the goals of the County in a rational and fair manner. We respectfully suggest that the second sentence of Section 22-4.4(h) be deleted and replaced with following language: Such repair, restoration or replacement work may, at the discretion of the Director, Public Works working with the applicant, include the construction of new curb-cuts for persons with disabilities, accessible driveways or other improvements such that all repair, restoration or replacement work comply with the current requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA); provided, however, that the Director sha{I not require any repair, restoration or replacement work that exceeds the scope of work identified in applicant's application for a construction permit. Ift~4~l®R9A~~ As proposed in Sill 205, Section 22-4.4(h) would require a utility that has performed construction activities in a County street to restore the street to meet the current requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA") even if the condition of the roadway at the commencement of construction did not meet ADA requirements. As I previously testified on an earlier version of this bill, i~~LCO supports the intent and purpose of ADA, but we firmly believe that the current language in Section 22-4.4(h) of Sill _205 will result in unmerited hardship on utilities that were not rost~~~T~~ital fc~r tta~ ~i"~i~r°i ~°~~J ~nstructior~ of nor-;~DAror~~plik~nt Co~ar7ty rc~~~i~~~~y~s. The utilities would be required to bring those roadways up to ADA standards merely because the utilities perform construction work in a County street to maintain service to the community. In my earlier testimony, I gave the example of a utility pole-repair project that required digging up of a sidewalk. In order to meet County standards, a utility pole must be located one and a half to two feet from the curb, but some of the older County sidewalks may be only five feet wide, which might not leave enough room for the utility pole while still complying with ADA wheelchair access requirements. In order to comply with Section 2~-4.~4(h) as currently drafted, the utility could be required to relocate the entire line and widen the sidewalk to meet ADA standards. Another example is if the utility need to replace a pole in the sidewalk, we will need to also replace the one block the pole is in. Installation of the new ADA compliant block with the proper slope, may result in a disjoint where the new and old sidewalks meet. `The current language is broad that it could mean that the whole sidewalk for the length of the subdivision block may need to be replaced. Such a result could overwhelm any normal maintenance and repair project and would unfairly shift the burden of ADA compliance to the utilities in the design and construction of County roadways if the scope of the proposed language is left broad. I•-i~LCO believes that a fairer procedure would be to give discretion to the Director, public Works, who has expertise in construction and design, to work with the applicant to determine any necessary ADA work that fits within the scope of the applic,ant's project. phis will enable achievement of the County's goal of ADA®compliant Ja?Y'~F H'Q~[. i •4C jy \a'~d~i ~ Harry Kim Galen M. Kuba Ma or Y :~'N~'~ow:.` Acting Director gTF•OF ~MP,~P ~LIr>LtxC~"~l' Ir~ ~t~~ttt DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT 25 Aupuni Street, Room 208 • Hilo, Hawaii 96720-4252 (808) 961-8083 • Fax (808) 961-8086 , MEMOIt~4ND UM ` r_-, DATE February 28, 2002 ' . r~ TO Chairperson James Y. Arakaki & Members, Hawaii County Council FROM Galen Kuba, Acting Director ~~-`a . SUB.TECT : Bill No. 225, Draft 5 Chapter 22 Relating to Streets ~ Sidewalks The following is a recap of information discussed in relation to Chapter 22 at the Council meeting held on February 21, 2002. 1. Does the State of Hawaii charge the County of Hawaii fees in relation to Solid Waste or other County projects? Yes. The State of Hawaii does not exempt the County of Hawaii when working within their right-of--way or easements. 2. Verizon/Helco request for exemption from Section 22-4.4 (h) relating to ADA compliance. Section 4.1.6 (j) of the ADA guidelines recognizes that strict compliance may not be technically feasible for existing buildings and facilities. For these cases an exception is made where accessibility shall be provided to the maximum extent that is feasible. A form (DCAB-FAU-1) has been developed by the Disability and Communication Access Board to review and document when an improvement is deemed to be "technically infeasible." Both utilities are aware of this procedure. Further, because this process adequately addresses the concerns raised by both companies no amendment is necessary. 3. Disability and Communication Access Board letter dated January 17, 2002 requesting amendments to Sections 22-4.3, 4.8 & 10. At this point, neither of the proposed amendments are viewed as critical because of the following: 1. Adding the phrase "Accessibility Guidelines" does not necessarily clarify the intent of language already present within the section. 2. Concerns about Section 22-4.8-4.10 are sufficiently covered in Bill 225, Draft 6, Sections 22-4.4 (k) & (1) that reference compliance with specifications and plans on file in the Department of Public Works. The department has developed appropriate plans and specification that address ADA concerns. ? ~ F11e No. ~ , ' pr. ~~Q streets while still allowing the applicant to perform its construction work in an efficient and cost effective manner. C®NCLIJ~B®N I-1ELC® respectfully requests that this bill be passed with the deletion of the second sentence of Section 22-4.4(h) and its replacement with the language proposed above. `Thank you for the opportunity to submit testimony on this matter. _ _ APR-16-2002 08:43 FROf1:REG.& GOVT. AFF. 546-6400 T0:808 961 8912 P.002~084 ~iL~. 2®~ AN C~I~piN;~;IUCE EIV~iBeIG CIH~APTE~ 2.2, OIR THE H~A164drAli C®UN°I°lf C®~E 7'983 (1995 EDiTiQN}, ~I~~A,~°iI~C3 T~ ~TREET~ d~IV® ~IDElHPP~,LKS ~Ai1i~. ®sHi~~ DIRECT®~ ~ Gc31~E~NAAENT~11! ~ei~'F~IR~ 1~EI~iZC~N I°Id~.liy~?BI AI~RIL 17, 2002 Chair Arakakl and ~lernbers of the Hawaii County Council: I am maul Oshiro, submifiting tesfifmony on behalf of Verizon Hawaii on dill 205, "AN OF~DINANCE AltAlwN®1NG CHAI~fiER 22, OF THE MAIMAI'I COUNTY CO®E 1983, RELATING TO STREETS AND SIDEWALK." ~U~11A6~ItY This bill creates a new chapter to dune and regulate cvnstructi®n within County streets; and uses withiro or adjacent to a County street that are not an integral part of its infrastructure or necessary for safe and lawful operation on the sfireet. This measure also mandates the naming of all streets wher® two or mor® county streets intersect. Verizon Hawaii supports this bill with an amendment to authorize the ~9irector of Public W®rks to ~exernpt repair, restoration, ®r replaoerro®nt work from complying with current requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act it the exemption is In the overall interest of the general public. RT~i Verizon Hawaii has concerns with Section 22-4.4(h} because i# dues not allow for flexibility of an existing unique circumstance that traay require a considerable amount of resources. Currently, County standards allow five feet wide sidewalks and require utility APR-16-2002 08:43 FROM:REG.& GOVT. AFF. 546-6400 T0:808 961 8912 P.003~004 poles to be located one-and-a-half to two feet from the curb of the street phis does not corvaply with currant ADS standards. If a utility pole in n®ed of repair was located on such anon-compliant stre®t which was also adjacent to a business such as a restaurant whose wall abuts fihe sidewalk--this mandate may entail sand®n'Snation of the burin®ss andlor the widening of the street, in addition to the sidewalk. Verizon hlaonraii would like to request fior the following am®ndment to Section 22-~4.4: "Section 2~-~.~ Construction permits; conditions. (h~ The applicant shall repair, restore, or replace all portions of a county street, including, but not limited to utilities, drainage ways and structures, traffic markings and signs, driveways and private property that had been altered, broken up, dug up, disturbed, undenvoined, dug under or otherwise dannaged during construction to a state equal to or butter than its original conditions. regardless of existing conditions, work shall also include the construction of new curb-cuffs far pars®ns with disabilifiies, accessibBe driveways or other improvements such that all repair, restoration or replaoervrant work comply with the current requirements of the Arvrericans with ®isabilities pct (ADA~,~,provi~ed ~ t e ~t~ol'ti®~a~ ~~~_,c~~,~ r®~aar~~r~.®q' i ~ rk fr~r~ '~ri w1tl~ the e e ~i~r~ t~ l_ra`~,~~v~ iii ~ east o~f th~a,~i°a1 pu~llo This amendment Weill allow for the Director of Public Works to determine on a case-by-case basis whether the overall interest of the general public would best be served by an exemptl®n from ADA requirements. 13y requiring the applicant, in this case, Verizon Hawaii, to comply with ADA guidolinss for any repair, restoration, or replacement work within a county street without taking infio consideration the possible land and infrastructure condemnation, the rnovemant of right-of~ways, the possible transferring of easements, or other relevant factors, this action may equate to direct cosfis being passed on to the consurroers, in this case, the residents of hlawaii County in the form of higher utility rates, . APR-16-2002 08:43 FROM:REG.& COU'T. AFF. 546-6400 T0: 808 961 8912 P.004~004 Variz®r~ Hevvsii r~spectfuily requests that this bill be passed vmith the prop®sed an~ndmant to S~etior~ 22-4.~, subse~ti®n (h). 'hank yore fior the opportunity to s~hmit t®stimony on this ~aefiker.