Undisabling -- Maintaining Accessability II

Doing More Than Minimum

A few years ago a new "super store" was opened locally and it was a great success in most ways. They did follow some new design ideas that are being incorporated more often now for the environment. They also probably help the bottom line...

One in particular is the incorporation of parking under the grocery store. A "super store" basically is a grocery store expanded to include much of a department store -- and in fact a department store and grocery store to rival a warehouse store or big box store. They are reminiscent to me of the old department stores that included a grocery store which rivalled any grocery store chain's store.

In this case of this new store's opening, that is one of the things that people were critical about. It wasn't that valuable space was saved in putting parking under the store, but rather that access to the store was made by ramps.

Other stores of near identical design had been built in Metro-Vancouver without so much complaint, but this one had a small difference -- this one did not also have elevators. The other stores all had elevators in addition to the ramps. The ramps are fairly gradual in slope and not too much effort for an able bodied person to climb. I think perhaps people with health issues might find them a bit taxing though. There are also stairs, I believe, though it has been a little while since I was there. People wanted to know why elevators were not included in this store and the reason given by the chain: "City bylaws did not require us to have elevators so we did not include them."

I think that it might be very important for municipalities, provinces, countries and other levels of government to have laws establishing minimum levels of compliance for such things as whether a building has elevators or what degree of slope an access ramp might have, but even if these might differ from area to area, certainly what should also be looked at is function. I can understand that having or not having an elevator does change the cost of a building, but especially when we are talking about a chain that has designs already made for the same or similar store with elevators, why not include an elevator simply to make the store more functional?

The cynic in me can think of reasons/excuses why not to put one in. One that comes to mind is that if you put one in, then you are liable for any accidental injury that it will cause. Of course you could always counter that with how many accidental injuries might be caused by not having it. I'm not a lawyer so I am probably naive in that counter argument.

What reminded me of this was a situation of someone I know who has been sick and in the hospital for a while. They have been doing fairly well with their artificial leg, but after recent surgery just are not up to climbing stairs or long ramps. Normally they use canes but for the moment they are using a walker. They aren't going out much but they have to go to the Doctor from time to time -- of course Doctors just don't make house-calls. The issue is that to get from the "Handicapped Parking" stalls to the door, a person has to negotiate either a long ramp or stairs.

This is not a building which has been retrofitted to allow for the handicapped parking. The building was designed as a medical-detal-legal office building from the start. In the designing didn't anyone anticipate that people who might be going in and out of such a building might actually be disabled and so it might be handy if there weren't major changes in elevation between the parking and the elevator lobby?

Probably the whole design does fit in with the Civic Bylaws and all the minimum standards set by the different levels of government with perhaps a few amendments which were applied for and granted in exchange for other accommodation. But the if the minimum is the bar that people aim for all the time, perhaps the bar has to be raised? -- at least for new buildings.

I can understand that when retrofitting existing structures minimum standards might be what is aimed for -- if at all possible -- but not for new structures. There might of course also be standards for voluntary compliance perhaps?

I am starting to consider if I might change my shopping patterns with a bias toward the more accessable locations. After all, if they are more willing to accomodate people with accessability issues, they probably also will do right by all of their customers.

Later!
~ Darrell

131.

__________
Handicapped signage image from Image*After.

...and I have a dream...

...of when we will no longer hear that someone is the first of their distinct group to overcome a hurdle

Please do not misunderstand, I think it is great that a "black man" is running to be American President -- Barack Obama & Joe Biden. (image to left -- image from CBS News) I think that it is great that a woman has been chosen to be the "running mate" to his opponent. (image to right -- image from post-gazette NOW) It is great that these firsts are happening. I just dream of the day when it will no longer be news that someone is "the first woman to run for an office" or "the first native American to climb Mount Everest."

I look forward to the time when the barriers to people have dropped so much that it will not be out of the ordinary for anyone to take on any job that they are suited for.

When I was young it was odd to be in a Taxi Cab that had a woman driver. When I was a young teen it felt nearly naughty to have a woman barber cutting my hair. Things have changed. Although they attained their position when their party leaders left office, I have lived in a country that had a Woman for Prime Minister -- The Right Honourable Kim Campbell (image to left -- image from The House of Commons Heritage Collection) -- and a province that had a Woman for Premier -- Rita Johnston (image to right -- image from Ministry of Community Services, Province of BC).

I do know there is discrimination still, and more in some places and in some people than others. It is also more in some times and circumstance than others. But I dream when it diminishes more and more.

I think there might always be fear of the unknown. Unknown cultures and unknown religions can bring fear, especially if that fear is fostered by those who wish people to fear newcomers or people who are a little different. But I think this will diminish eventually.

Until then we will still hear of these firsts.

Later!
~ Darrell

129.

My Speech is Freer than Your Speech!

Does One Person's Right to Speak Supersede Another's Right to Hear?

I do believe in the right to free speech, though I am not American and my rights come from different roots than the American Constitution. Still I have started wondering at the expression of the right to be heard as used by some groups in our society.

I might disagree with some policies put forward by government or by crown corporations. I might dislike fare increases by public transit. On the other hand, I might agree with some of them. I do know that when I go to a public hearing to hear what the politicians and other groups have to say, I want to actually hear what they have to say and watch their presentation. I want to know what the various politicians have to say and what the assorted boards which are making policy are up to. I want to see their arguments to defend their positions.

But, now at civic meetings and such I see protesters coming in as organized hecklers -- shouting over the speakers and everyone else with every intent to disrupt the meeting it seems. It seems for the simple reason that they disagree and they want their message to be heard. They are asserting their right to free speech... but I think perhaps this is not what is meant by freedom of speech.

I think that the protesters have every right to speak out and every right to protest, but I somehow think there is something wrong with their preventing others from speaking out whether board member or simple citizen.

I am seeing more and more of this sort of thing. There are too many times when the protests are outshouting the presentation and I do not think the fault is that of the organizers for not providing louder sound systems. I am sure that protesting voices are heard even if at organized protests. We are allowed to do that here. There are other places where they don't have the freedom to organize a protest event.

I might not agree with what someone is saying at a presentation, but I do agree they have the right to say it -- say it and be heard.

Later!
~ Darrell

123.