The document is a 9-page complaint form submitted to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Architectural Access Board regarding accessibility issues at a 4-level commercial building in Somerville, MA. It details 16 alleged violations of the Board's 1987 accessibility regulations, including lack of an accessible route between entrances, insufficient signage, inaccessible features like bathroom stalls and conference room slopes, and lack of elevator access to all floors. The complaint provides photos and details for each alleged violation.
AAB complaint submitted in 2010. AAB sends First Notice approximately 1 year later, after reminder by FOIA. CAPS re-surveys portions of complaint in September 2011 and amends complaint to reflect certain corrections made by owner as a result of the complaint. As of 9/28/2013, no further correspondence from AAB on this docket.
CAPS filed a Motion for Reconsideration with the MA Architectural Access Board on March 5, 2012 after the AAB's Compliance officer failed to track down certain details.
The AAB thereupon sent the City a copy of this Motion, requesting those details.
7/13/12: CAPS has still not received any follow-up from the AAB on whether the City provided the requested information
AAB complaint submitted in 2010. AAB sends First Notice approximately 1 year later, after reminder by FOIA. CAPS re-surveys portions of complaint in September 2011 and amends complaint to reflect certain corrections made by owner as a result of the complaint. As of 9/28/2013, no further correspondence from AAB on this docket.
CAPS filed a Motion for Reconsideration with the MA Architectural Access Board on March 5, 2012 after the AAB's Compliance officer failed to track down certain details.
The AAB thereupon sent the City a copy of this Motion, requesting those details.
7/13/12: CAPS has still not received any follow-up from the AAB on whether the City provided the requested information
Fairfax County Little River Turnpike Walkway August 2020Fairfax County
The Little River Turnpike walkway pedestrian improvement project was completed on June 29, 2020. The project increases pedestrian safety from Columbia Rd. to Mayhunt Ct. with 2580 linear feet of 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk.
The Lower Don Trail is a 4.7 kilometre section of multi-use trail for pedestrians and cyclists that runs along the Don River, from Pottery Road to Corktown Commons.
This project includes a number of works to improve the conditions of the existing trail and access into the surrounding trail network.
Construction is starting September 2015. Learn more here and at www.toronto.ca/lowerdontrail
While the City of Somerville was reconstructing the Front Entrance ramp to City Hall, public meetings were being held without provision of adequate physical access into this facility.
Several residents called the Community Access Project and requested that we survey these issues. We surveyed the exterior of City Hall andsubmitted this complaint to the MA Architectural Access Board.
the City ADA Coordinator responded with a request to "continue the complaint until November 1, 2011."
The Community Access Project, Somerville and the Boston Center for Independent Living have a partnership in analyzing and advocating for maximal accessibility in all public buildings, including residential project, in the Greater Boston area. this project involves 349 units located within Roxbury, Dorchester and Mattapan.
Fairfax County Little River Turnpike Walkway August 2020Fairfax County
The Little River Turnpike walkway pedestrian improvement project was completed on June 29, 2020. The project increases pedestrian safety from Columbia Rd. to Mayhunt Ct. with 2580 linear feet of 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk.
The Lower Don Trail is a 4.7 kilometre section of multi-use trail for pedestrians and cyclists that runs along the Don River, from Pottery Road to Corktown Commons.
This project includes a number of works to improve the conditions of the existing trail and access into the surrounding trail network.
Construction is starting September 2015. Learn more here and at www.toronto.ca/lowerdontrail
While the City of Somerville was reconstructing the Front Entrance ramp to City Hall, public meetings were being held without provision of adequate physical access into this facility.
Several residents called the Community Access Project and requested that we survey these issues. We surveyed the exterior of City Hall andsubmitted this complaint to the MA Architectural Access Board.
the City ADA Coordinator responded with a request to "continue the complaint until November 1, 2011."
The Community Access Project, Somerville and the Boston Center for Independent Living have a partnership in analyzing and advocating for maximal accessibility in all public buildings, including residential project, in the Greater Boston area. this project involves 349 units located within Roxbury, Dorchester and Mattapan.
Disability Rights expert Eileen Feldman submitted complaint to Federal Highway Administration #CivilRights division based on City of Somerville, MA noncompliance with ADA requirements on March 12, 2012. Result: City of Somerville agreed to hire a full time ADA Coordinator, to produce a current ADA Self Evaluation and to develop the subsequent ADA Transition Plan.
disAbility + human rights activist Eileen Feldman submits public comments on the Massachusetts 2013 draft, Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing (AI). The Massachusetts 2013 draft is here: http://www.mass.gov/hed/docs/dhcd/hd/fair/draft2013analysis.pdf
ACS 2012. Selected Economic Characteristics for the Civilian Noninstitutionalized Population By Disability Status, 1-Yr. Estimates, Table S1811.
Astonishing stats indicate that in 2012: 22.1% of Americans with Disabilities are below 100% of poverty level, compared with 12.7% of Americans without disabilities.
1 in 4 (25%) Americans with disabilities aged 25+ still don't have a high school diploma, compared with 11.1% of Americans without disabilities.
5.1% of the "Employed Population Age 16 and Over" are Americans living with disAbilities, compared to the 94.7% of the American workforce who still live without disabilities.
It doesn't make sense that Americans with disabilities are still not "presumed disadvantaged" for purposes of gaining advantages and resources in Federal SBA employment and entrepreneurship resources.
Congress needs to take note, show leadership and moral courage, and recognize that Americans with disAbilities are ready and waiting in the wings for a chance to shine.
Give us equal opportunities in education and employment, make much-needed infrastructure investments in accessibility in all public-service facilities (including the Capital and other GSA assets), and hire more ppl with disAbilities (PwD) in leadership positions at all Federal agencies, especially DOJ, HUD, DOL, and HHS.
The 2012 American Community Survey (ACS), Table B22010, shows that approx. 7 million of the approx. 16 million households receiving Food Stamps/SNAPS nationwide have 1 or more family member living with at least 1 disability. Yup- that's approx. 44% (43.7%)
H.97 is named ""An Act to promote employment for people with disabilities." My testimony summarized: Let's call it by its real name. This is a bill to promote subminimum-wage employment for a certain class called persons with disabilities (PwD), while promoting a situation in which a certain non-profit entity (to be designated by the Council proposed by this bill) would receive certain non-competitive lucrative state contracts while managing those low-wage workers in (generally) sheltered-workshop settings.
House Bill no. 136, filed in January 2013, is a petition to increase the Commonwealth of Massachusett's compliance with federal law meeting requirements of the Amercians with DisAbilities Act. This written testimony explains that the US Dept. of Labor Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs announced a Final Rule on August 27, 2013, which made changes to the regs implementing Section 503 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. Most important is the establishment of the 7 percent workforce utilization goal for individuals with disabilities (IWD). Massachusetts has an important opportunity at this time to develop into a Model Employer of Individuals with DisAbilities!
City of Somerville MA signed voluntary agreement with US Dept. of Education in May 2013. This is not a comprehensive list of Somerville's Library deficiencies
The City of Somerville hired an outside consultant to deal with curb cut and sidewalk accessibility complaints. The Community Access Project, an all-volunteer group of disAbility rights experts, responds to that document, pointing out gaps and problems with 2011 "remediations". We also remind the Architectural Access Board why they should enforce the code that prohibits apex curb cuts where perpendicular or parallel curb cuts are feasible to construct. Curb cuts need to be adequately oriented to the crosswalks; and, the crosswalks need to be perpendicular to the curb line. It's a public safety issue in addition to a human rights issue. We deserve safe, accessible and integrated Complete Streets.
Somerville's Mayor Joseph E. Curtatone Attempts to have the U.S. Surgeon General Launch a Statewide Event At an Inaccessible Facility.
But, State officials do the right thing and respond immediately to the factual, verifiable information presented in this letter.
Original MAPC announcement (March 21, 2012) included in document.
Somerville Disability Commissioners, 2006, attempted to form a collaborative strategy to address and implement bus stop accessibility improvements. But the City staff were unwilling to broker a good-faith relationship with the MBTA.
At one meeting, City ADA Coordinator Campbell summed up the city’s stance with the following words, “YOU (MBTA) were sued, so YOU should be doing this. We didn’t do anything wrong and we don’t have to do anything for you.”
meetings disintegrated in April 2008, after no Somerville staff promises were upheld.
Although the Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum is completing a $57 million dollar project which includes placing a gorgeous new facility on the historic site and modernizing the historic Palace, they requested Variances to exempt them from modernizing certain details so that people with disabilities can have equal opportunities to work in, and visit this Museum, same as nondisabled people.
The MA Historical Commission supported their request for a Variance by stating,"The MHC has reviewed the proposed variance requests and believes that without the variance, a significant amount of historic fabric would be damaged, required to be removed, or completely altered beyond recognition. Additionally, the museum may find it impossible to meet the intent of Ms. Gardner's will and its mission."
This letter, a response from DisAbility Rights advocates to the Museum and MA Historical Commission, was sent to the State Board as testimony during the Gardner Museum's Variance Hearing, November 28, 2011.
More from eilily Community Access Project, Somerville (20)
हम आग्रह करते हैं कि जो भी सत्ता में आए, वह संविधान का पालन करे, उसकी रक्षा करे और उसे बनाए रखे।" प्रस्ताव में कुल तीन प्रमुख हस्तक्षेप और उनके तंत्र भी प्रस्तुत किए गए। पहला हस्तक्षेप स्वतंत्र मीडिया को प्रोत्साहित करके, वास्तविकता पर आधारित काउंटर नैरेटिव का निर्माण करके और सत्तारूढ़ सरकार द्वारा नियोजित मनोवैज्ञानिक हेरफेर की रणनीति का मुकाबला करके लोगों द्वारा निर्धारित कथा को बनाए रखना और उस पर कार्यकरना था।
‘वोटर्स विल मस्ट प्रीवेल’ (मतदाताओं को जीतना होगा) अभियान द्वारा जारी हेल्पलाइन नंबर, 4 जून को सुबह 7 बजे से दोपहर 12 बजे तक मतगणना प्रक्रिया में कहीं भी किसी भी तरह के उल्लंघन की रिपोर्ट करने के लिए खुला रहेगा।
role of women and girls in various terror groupssadiakorobi2
Women have three distinct types of involvement: direct involvement in terrorist acts; enabling of others to commit such acts; and facilitating the disengagement of others from violent or extremist groups.
01062024_First India Newspaper Jaipur.pdfFIRST INDIA
Find Latest India News and Breaking News these days from India on Politics, Business, Entertainment, Technology, Sports, Lifestyle and Coronavirus News in India and the world over that you can't miss. For real time update Visit our social media handle. Read First India NewsPaper in your morning replace. Visit First India.
CLICK:- https://firstindia.co.in/
#First_India_NewsPaper
03062024_First India Newspaper Jaipur.pdfFIRST INDIA
Find Latest India News and Breaking News these days from India on Politics, Business, Entertainment, Technology, Sports, Lifestyle and Coronavirus News in India and the world over that you can't miss. For real time update Visit our social media handle. Read First India NewsPaper in your morning replace. Visit First India.
CLICK:- https://firstindia.co.in/
#First_India_NewsPaper
31052024_First India Newspaper Jaipur.pdfFIRST INDIA
Find Latest India News and Breaking News these days from India on Politics, Business, Entertainment, Technology, Sports, Lifestyle and Coronavirus News in India and the world over that you can't miss. For real time update Visit our social media handle. Read First India NewsPaper in your morning replace. Visit First India.
CLICK:- https://firstindia.co.in/
#First_India_NewsPaper
In a May 9, 2024 paper, Juri Opitz from the University of Zurich, along with Shira Wein and Nathan Schneider form Georgetown University, discussed the importance of linguistic expertise in natural language processing (NLP) in an era dominated by large language models (LLMs).
The authors explained that while machine translation (MT) previously relied heavily on linguists, the landscape has shifted. “Linguistics is no longer front and center in the way we build NLP systems,” they said. With the emergence of LLMs, which can generate fluent text without the need for specialized modules to handle grammar or semantic coherence, the need for linguistic expertise in NLP is being questioned.
Do Linguistics Still Matter in the Age of Large Language Models.pptx
MA AAB Complaint 66 70 Union Square Plaza Building
1. The Commonwealth of Massachusetts
Department of Public Safety Docket Number
Architectural Access Board
____________
One Ashburton Place, Room 1310 (Office Use Only)
Boston Massachusetts 02108-1618
Phone: 617-727-0660
Fax: 617-727-0665
www.mass.gov/dps
GENERAL BUILDING COMPLAINT FORM
PLEASE BE ADVISED THAT THIS FORM IS A MATTER OF PUBLIC RECORD AND WILL
BE DISCLOSED UPON REQUEST.
1. What is the name and address of the building believed to be in violation of the Rules and
Regulations of this Board?
Name: _Union Square Plaza Building
Address: _66-70 Union Square
City/Town: _Somerville, MA 02143
2. What is the use of the building (please check one or more)?
____Retail Establishment ____Transient Lodging Facility ____Multiple
Dwelling __x__Commercial Building ____Educational Facility ____Medical
Care Facility ____Place of Assembly ____Detention Facility ____House of
Worship
__x__Restaurant ____Transportation Terminal ____Recreational
Facility
Note: at least 2 City of Somerville Federally-funded programs currently rent this facility's office
space from the owner, Don Warner. Owner was granted a Variance to remove the platform
lift and make the Back Door the Accessible Entrance, on August 9, 2010. As of this writing,
November 12, 2010, there is still no accessible route, no Accessible Entrance, no Accessible
entrance signage, and the platform lift is sometimes being used as a trash receptacle:
3. Does it appear that the building was recently constructed or renovated?
Most recent ongoing renovations began in 2008 for the Union Square Main Streets Program
(USMS). A new HUD (CBDG)-funded Design Annex space was created by and for USMS.
Page 1 of 9 Rev, 01/10
2. The owner donated at least $20,000 for these alterations, which included a mezzanine not
reachable by vertical access.
In October 2009, the parking lot was restriped. A separate parking lot complaint is submitted.
In 2010, minor alterations are being made, including painting, permanent interior signage, fire
safety and communications installations.
Prior to 2008: the owner sought AAB variances to provide a Platform Lift instead of Main
Entrance Access (1988) and to repair the front without provided accessible route to the
downstairs front entrance (1998). In 1988, he estimated he would spend $750,000 to change
the facility from a Police Station to a multi-use facility, including Offices and a Restaurant.
The assessed value of this building at that time was $120,000.
The owner continues to inform his tenants, in writing, that he completed all renovations
compliant with the MAAB regulations in effect during his initial renovations.
This Building complaint will reference Sections from 521 CMR 1987 regulations.
4. What date were you most recently at the building? 11/3/10
5. How many floors? 4 floors, including an excavated basement with a popular Restaurant/Bar.
6. Please check the appropriate section(s) of the Board's regulations that you believe is
being violated, then describe each section, as specifically as possible, in the space below.
The following pages detail 19 complaints, based on 521 CMR, 1987 regulations.
The owner spent over 100% of the assessed value of the building to substantially
renovate it, per his AAB Variance Request of 1988.
UPCOMING PUBLIC EVENT AT THIS FACILITY INCLUDES: The Union
Square Winter Craft Market , (facilitated by the City of Somerville's CDBG-
funded Union Square Main Streets program), will take place in this building
on Saturday, December 4 from 11 am to 4 pm, at the downstairs Precinct.
OPTIONAL INFORMATION
The following information is optional, and your complaint will be processed regardless of
whether or not the information is provided. However, you should be aware that the less
information that is provided, the longer it will take this office to process your complaint.
a. Name and address of the building owner or manager:__Don Warner, HDR Architecture,
Inc. | 695 Atlantic Ave, Boston, MA 02111-2623 office: 617.357.7775 | cell:
617.821.2707 | fax: 617.357.7759
b. The Board only considers complaints with respect to buildings which are:
1.) constructed by the state, city or town, and construction, reconstruction, alteration or
remodeling occurred after December of 1968; or
2.) privately financed buildings that are open to or used by the public and construction,
reconstruction, alteration or remodeling occurred after June 10, 1975.
The following information may be obtained by contacting the Local Building Department
DATE BUILDING PERMIT(S) WAS ISSUED: __________________________________
ESTIMATE COST(S) OF CONSTRUCTION: ~$750,000 in 1988; $100,000 in 1998;
$25,000+ since 2008.
Page 2 of 9 Rev, 01/10
3. c. The assessed value of the building will determine the extent that a building must comply.
You may obtain the assessed value of the building by contacting the Local Assessor's
Office.
ASSESSED VALUE OF THE BUILDING AT TIME PERMIT WAS ISSUED: This complaint
is about outstanding issues from 1987 regulations, when assessed value during initial
substantial renovations was $120,000 per 1988 MAAB notes.
______________________________________________________________________
7. Name and address of person/organization filing this complaint (if organization is filing, please
provide the Board with the name of a contact person) (required):_
Community Access Project of Somerville
8. Individual Signature (required): scanned signature provided
Date: 11/12/10
The following 7 pages show 16 elements believed to be in violation of 521 CMR, 1987
regulations. Photos are included.
This is not a comprehensive survey, since we did not measure hallways and certain amenities in
hallways such as signage (only temporary interior signage was seen) or height of Exit signage and
fire devices, did not survey all bathroom elements, did not survey the newly remodeled USMS and
Design Annex Office spaces, and did not survey the elevator.
Below from left to right: Front Main Entrance, beginning of common alleyway route to back, Back
door w/HP spot
Page 3 of 9 Rev, 01/10
4. 1. 5.3 Accessible route/path of travel. A continuous route of travel, connecting all elements,
routes and spaces within or between buildings is still NOT PROVIDED.
The back door entrance is over 300 feet away from the front Main Entrance, and within the parking
lot area. Excessive cross slopes measured (after city sidewalk passage from Main Entrance to
curbcut to Sanborn Court): Common alleyway route adjacent to Sanborn Court: 3.4% at beginning,
4.7% mid-way, and 6.5% before turning into parking lot. In facility parking lot: 4.2%. midway.
(Slopes are OK within 5 feet of back door):
Page 4 of 9 Rev, 01/10
5. 2. 26.4 The accessible entrance(s) shall be on a level which permits access to building elevators
where provided.
a. the elevator does not provide Public access to the downstairs level, which is the Precinct. (In 1988, it
was The Elephant Walk):
b. The elevator does not provide any access to the new first floor Design Access mezzanine
space, which opened to the public in 2009. Two pictures of the mezzanine below, from:
http://dannex.org/about-the-design-annex/what-is-the-design-annex/photos/
3. 26.7 Identification: Any entrance of a facility not accessible by persons in wheelchairs shall
have a sign clearly indicating the location of the accessible entrance.
There is no signage clearly indicating any accessible entrance in the front or the back:
Page 5 of 9 Rev, 01/10
6. 4. 27.7 Exterior thresholds shall not exceed one-half inch in height, bevelled on both sides. Interior
thresholds shall be flush with the floor. Changes in floor materials may require an edge strip or
threshold flush with the higher material and beveled at a ratio of one-in-four.
Back door threshold is over 2 inches:
5. 27.11 Doors in the means of egress shall be operable with one hand and with a single effort. Doors
in the paths of ingress shall be able to be unlocked and opened with one hand.
The door is kept locked to the public:
6. 28.3 Handrails shall be set on both sides of such stairs at a height of 34 inches above the
intersection of tread and riser.
Handrails are only on one side of Emergency egress stairs. 2 photos below show that Stair hall:
Page 6 of 9 Rev, 01/10
7. 7. 28.4 The hand-grip portion of handrails shall be not less than one and one-quarter and not more
than 2 inches in outside diameter, shall be round in cross section.
Foyer handrails are 2 inches wide and rectangular in cross section:
8. 28.5 Clearance between a wall and its wall rail shall be one and one-half inches.
See above picture, left. Foyer handrails are 2 inches away from wall.
9. 29.1 The floor on any single story shall be of a common level throughout, except where a ramp
(as described in Section 25) connects different levels.
The Conference Room, used for State-monitored, (DHCD/ HHS-funded) Board meetings as well as the
Somerville Executive Directors Meetings, has a slope that's 8.8%, leading from hallway into Conference
Room:
10. 30.5 Toilet stalls: Each toilet room shall have at least one stall which:
30.5.1 is 60 inches wide and 72 inches deep;
First floor bathroom measures 56 inches wide.
Page 7 of 9 Rev, 01/10
8. 11. 30.5.2 has a door or opening that is 36 inches wide, a self-closing hinge device and a pull
device to assist in closing the door... and has a lock located approximately 36 inches above the
floor.
According to a survey done by IHCD, The door opens to less than 32 inches wide, and does not have a
self-closing spring, nor a pull device. The 3 pictures below are copied from the IHCD survey done for
an organizational tenant, (page 20, 66-70 Union Square report 6-25-1-2010):
12. 30.5.3 water closet is 18 inches from the centerline of the fixture to the nearest side wall,maintains
at least 42 inches clear space, measured from centerline of toilet to the farthest wall or other fixture...
approximately 16 inches to nearest side wall approximately 40 inches measured to far wall.
13. 35.1 Buildings having 2 levels shall provide a ramp or elevator to each level; buildings having
more than 2 levels shall provide elevator access to each level.
This is a 4 level building. No elevator access is provided to the Public to the basement (Precinct) level.
There are clear safety reasons for this; however, it means that all programs, services and events held
within the Precinct are not accessible. Can a policy solution be implemented; for example, persons
requiring access to the Precinct from the elevator will have access to a 2-way communications system at
the back door, and will be escorted by staff down to the Precinct?
14. 35.9 Door jamb markings indicating floor designations shall be provided at each hoistway
entrance on both sides of jamb visible from within the car and lobby at a height of 60 inches
Page 8 of 9 Rev, 01/10
9. above the floor. Numbers shall be on a contrasting color background a minimum of 2 1/2 inches
high.
There are no door jamb markings on either side of hoistway entrance- 1st and 2nd floors checked only:
15. 40.1 The ISA shall be displayed in the following locations:
40.1.1 Any entrance of a facility not accessible by persons in wheelchairs shall have a sign
clearly indicating the location of the accessible entrance.
See photos for Number 3, above: no entrance signage in front, NO entrance signage in back.
16. 40.1.3 where signs, maps, building locations, the ISA shall indicate where accessible toilets,
entrances, and elevators are located. the viewers position shall be clearly indicated on these
maps. Below is back door Notice with map and location instructions, no indication of HP
features:
Page 9 of 9 Rev, 01/10