SELF-EVALUATION AND TRANSITION PLAN

COMPTON ENGINEERING, INC. 1706 CONVENT AVE.

PASCAGOULA, MISSISSIPPI 39567 PHONE: 228-762-3970 FAX: 228-769-9079

AUGUST 2017

215-060

A M E R I C A N S W I T H D I S A B I L I T I E S A C T

A M E R I C A N S W I T H D I S A B I L I T I E S A C T

SELF-EVALUATION AND

TRANSITION PLAN

215-060

August 2017

COMPTON ENGINEERING, INC. PASCAGOULA, MISSISSIPPI

CE Architectural Designs, PLLC ARCHITECTURAL CONSULTANT

COMPTON ENGINEERING, INC. TABLE OF CONTENTS

215-060 TOC-1

SELF-EVALUATION AND TRANSITION PLAN

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE

INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................................. 1

ADA BACKGROUND ....................................................................................................................................... 1

Defined .......................................................................................................................................................... 1

History and Purpose .................................................................................................................................... 1

Titles of the ADA ......................................................................................................................................... 1

Revised Standards ....................................................................................................................................... 2

Self-Evaluation and Transition Plan .......................................................................................................... 2

PROJECT PURPOSE AND DESCRIPTION .................................................................................................. 2

Purpose ......................................................................................................................................................... 2

Description ................................................................................................................................................... 3

Goals ...................................................................................................................................................... 3

Phases .................................................................................................................................................... 3

PROJECT APPROACH .................................................................................................................................... 4

Phase 1 – Self-Evaluation ............................................................................................................................ 4

Primary Goal – Rights-of-Way ............................................................................................................... 4

Secondary Goal – Facilities ................................................................................................................... 5

Phase 2 – Transition Plan ........................................................................................................................... 5

Primary Goal – Rights-of-Way ............................................................................................................... 6

Secondary Goal – Facilities ................................................................................................................... 6

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS .............................................................................................................................. 7

Primary Goal – Rights-of-Way .................................................................................................................. 7

Noncompliance examples ....................................................................................................................... 7

Secondary Goal – Facilities ......................................................................................................................... 9

Noncompliance examples (Facilities/Buildings) .................................................................................... 10

Noncompliance examples (Recreation Facilities) .................................................................................. 12

RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................................................... 13

Timeline for Corrections ............................................................................................................................. 13

Priorities ....................................................................................................................................................... 13

Phase 1 – Rights-of-Way ........................................................................................................................ 14

Phase 2 – Facilities ................................................................................................................................ 15

Refining the Scope of Work ........................................................................................................................ 16

Safe Harbor ............................................................................................................................................ 16

Undue Burden ........................................................................................................................................ 16

Disproportionality .................................................................................................................................. 16

Self Performed Work .................................................................................................................................. 16

Maintenance ........................................................................................................................................... 16

Changes in Elevation ............................................................................................................................. 17

Unstable Path of Travel ......................................................................................................................... 17

Overgrown Vegetation ........................................................................................................................... 17

Furniture Location ................................................................................................................................. 17

Minor Repairs ........................................................................................................................................ 17

Education ..................................................................................................................................................... 17

Policies .......................................................................................................................................................... 18

COMPTON ENGINEERING, INC. TABLE OF CONTENTS

215-060 TOC-2

PAGE

PROJECT SUMMARY ..................................................................................................................................... 18

CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................................................... 19

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ...................................................................................................................... 20

City of Pascagoula’s ADA Policy Statement

City of Pascagoula ADA Coordinator

City of Pascagoula Grievance Procedure

City of Pascagoula Accessibility Contact Information

RESOURCES ...................................................................................................................................................... 21

ADA Southeast Center Contact Information

United States Department of Justice – Civil Rights Division Contact Information

Funding Sources

ATTACHMENTS

1. Rights-of-Way Estimated Budget Cost Summary

2. Rights-of-Way Estimated Budget Cost Breakdown

3. Public Facilities Estimated Budget Cost Summary

4. Recreation Facilities Estimated Budget Cost Summary

5. Parks and Open Spaces Estimated Budget Cost Summary

6. FFCS Public Rights-of-Way Road Map

7. Public Facilities Location Map

8. Recreation Facilities Location Map

9. Parks and Open Spaces Location Map

10. City of Pascagoula Grievance Form

11. Transition Plan spreadsheets

REFERENCES

1. 1991 ADA Standards

2. 2010 ADA Standards

3. accessboard.gov

4. ADA.gov

5. cityofpascagoula.com

6. MDOT Curb Ramp Design Elements

1 | P a g e

INTRODUCTION

Access to civic life is something most take for granted; however, it’s a

struggle for many disabled citizens. Discrimination against people with

disabilities prevents many citizens from maintaining an active life within

their community. Accessibility to the blind, wheelchair-bound, or the

elderly, to name a few, can be a difficult experience. Whether it’s a

physical barrier or a policy, discrimination against people with

disabilities prevents many from maintaining an active life within the

community.

In many cases, cities are unaware of the various barriers people with disabilities face, making participating in civic

life difficult. The City of Pascagoula (City) recognizes this issue and believes that each citizen should have full

access to the many programs, services and activities it offers. Therefore, in keeping with the requirements of the

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the City, by means of this assessment, has initiated a plan to identify and

eliminate barriers to the disabled.

ADA BACKGROUND

Defined

The ADA is a comprehensive civil rights law for persons with disabilities with the purpose of providing a clear and

comprehensive national mandate for the elimination of discrimination against individuals with disabilities in both

employment and the access to goods and services. In short, the ADA is an "equal opportunity" law for people with

disabilities, providing access to an active life.

History and Purpose

The ADA actually started years ago from disabled Americans who challenged the social injustices of the lack of

accessible freedom. It is not a building code; it is a civil rights law, much as the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Originally

signed into law in 1990, the ADA became effective in January 1992. The law ensures that people with disabilities

have the same opportunities as everyone else to participate in the mainstream of American life. It not only extends to

issues with physical access, but also to policies, procedures, and communication that permit people with disabilities

to participate in programs and to access important information. The ADA seeks to dispel stereotypes and

assumptions about disabilities and to assure equal opportunity, full participation, independent living, and economic

self-sufficiency for people with disabilities.

Titles of the ADA

There are five (5) titles of the ADA. Each title has a primary focus for different aspects regarding

discrimination against the disabled in civic life: Title I – Employment; Title II – State and Local

Government; Title III – Public Accommodations; Title IV – Telecommunications; and Title V –

Relationship to other laws, and health insurance. For the purposes of this report Title II will be

used as the reference in the identification of noncompliance issues.

Title II requires that all state and local governments, public entities, or agencies, insure individuals with disabilities

have access to all of their programs, services and activities. This not only includes individuals with mobility

disabilities, but also for individuals with needs related to speech, cognitive, vision and hearing disabilities. In order

to eliminate discrimination towards the disabled, the causes of discrimination must be identified. Once identified,

work to correct these deficiencies can begin.

The Title II regulations were published in July 1991 and included the 1991 ADA Standards for Accessible Design

(1991 Standards). These standards contain scoping and technical requirements for accessibility to buildings and

facilities by individuals with disabilities under the ADA of 1990. These scoping and technical requirements are to be

applied during the design, construction, and alteration of buildings and facilities covered by Title II of the ADA to

the extent required by regulations issued by Federal agencies, including the Department of Justice and the

Department of Transportation, under the ADA.

2 | P a g e

Revised Standards

On March 15, 2012, the 2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design (2010 Standards) replaced the 1991 Standards

and required that any newly constructed or altered facilities must comply with all of the requirements in the 2010

Standards. There are some differences between the two standards.

The 2010 Standards provide more detail on accessible features, dimensional ranges for certain items and added

requirements for recreation facilities. Also of note is the lack of Right-of-Way standards, which are now contained

within the Proposed Rights-Of-Way Accessibility Guidelines dated July 2011 (PROWAG).

The PROWAG, currently an advisory standard, ensures that pedestrian circulation facilities in public rights-of-way

such as sidewalks, curb ramps, pedestrian street crossings, pedestrian signals, etc., constructed or altered in the

public rights-of-way are readily accessible to and usable by pedestrians with disabilities. When the guidelines are

adopted, compliance with the accessibility standards will be mandatory. The Mississippi Department of

Transportation (MDOT) requires the PROWAG standards be used in all State funded projects.

Self-Evaluation and Transition Plan

According to Title II of the ADA, state and local governments and public entities are required to perform self

evaluations of their current facilities and services, relative to the accessibility requirements of the ADA. Following

the self-evaluation, a transition plan must be created to address the barriers identified in the self-evaluation by

providing recommended corrections, cost analyis and priorities to eliminate these barriers.

The Self-Evaluation and Transition Plan (Plan) is a tool developed for immediate and continual use to identify and

correct the accessibility barriers. Self-evaluation identifies and evaluates the noncompliant policies, procedures,

access routes and facilities to determine what modification and correction is required to meet the ADA requirements.

The Transition Plan is the process by which the noncompliant issues receive recommendations for correction. These

recommendations include the correction itself, cost estimates and priorities for construction. The plan also provides

a means to track the noncompliant issues, their modifications and corrections, and should be updated periodically to

track the progression of improvements.

PROJECT PURPOSE AND DESCRIPTION

Purpose

Through the actions taken by the City, it is obvious the City is committed to the removal of all accessible barriers

that deter or prevent its citizens and employees from having freedom of access within the City and the workplace.

To accomplish this, the City has initiated the development for an ADA Self-Evaluation and Transition Plan (Plan).

This Plan is to serve as a tool to document the identification and the correction of accessibility deficiencies within

the City by:

• Locating and identifying noncompliant issues.

• Providing recommended corrections and estimated budget costs.

• Organizing and prioritizing the noncompliant issues for correction.

• Providing a usable electronic spreadsheet for the City’s use to document and track work.

From the information presented within this Plan, the City will make reasonable modifications in policies, practices,

procedures, and to physical barriers as required to avoid or eliminate discrimination against individuals with

disabilities. Benefits of the Plan are to promote pedestrian safety and access public right-of-way paths of travel and

public facilities.

3 | P a g e

Description

The City established two goals for evaluation: Public rights-of-ways as the Primary Goal, and public facilities as the

Secondary Goal. The content of each goal was selected by the City and each will be assessed in two separate phases:

the Evaluation Phase and Transition Plan Phase. These phases will be used to systematically identify, evaluate, and

provide correction recommendations for the noncompliant issues found.

Goals:

The Primary Goal consisted of selected public rights-of-way included in the Federal Function Classification System

(FFCS) with priority of commercial and high pedestrian trafficked areas. The items evaluated within this goal

include such items as curb ramps, sidewalks, pedestrian street crossings and on-street parking. The rights-of-ways

are divided into three categories:

1. Principal Arterial Roads

2. Minor Arterial Roads

3. Collector/Rural Major Collector Roads

(Reference Attachment 6 – FFCS Public Rights-of-Way Road Map.)

There are approximately 43 miles of the arterial/collector roads. The selected rights-of-way were evaluated using the

PROWAG as the governing standard, as required by the MDOT.

The Secondary Goal consists of selected public facilities with priority of accessibility to, accessibility within the

facility, its restrooms, and additional access items. The public facilities are divided into three separate categories:

1. Public Facilities (buildings)

2. Recreation Facilities

3. Parks and Open Spaces

(Reference Attachment 7 – Public Facilities Location Map, Attachment 8 – Recreation Facilities Location Map, and

Attachment 9 – Parks and Open Spaces Location Map.)

There are approximately thirty (30) public facilities (buildings), twelve (12) recreation facilities and twenty (20)

parks and open spaces. Each facility was evaluated using the applicable governing Standard (1991 or 2010) as

required by the ADA.

Phases:

The two phases of which the Primary and Secondary Goals were evaluated are as follows:

Phase 1: Self-Evaluation

The Self-Evaluation phase identifies and evaluates the public right-of-way pathways and public facilities for

noncompliant items which create accessibility barriers. Once identified noncompliant items were evaluated notating

the ADA Standard or PROWAG reference number, infraction and photographed for reference and use in Phase 2.

The evaluations are based on conditions that were visible at the time of the assessment. However, since the

evaluations some improvements have been addressed, or are being addressed by current or future projects.

Phase 2: Transition Plan

The Transition Plan phase develops the information identified in Phase 1 by providing recommended corrections,

budget costs and priorities to establish repair/replacement projects for their correction. The Plan is also to be used by

the City as an instrument to continually manage, monitor, and track current and future accessibility issues, update

the deficiency status, and report progress in meeting the Plan and eliminating discriminating features throughout the

City.

4 | P a g e

The Plan provides the City with a better understanding of the noncompliance issues and volume of work requiring

correction. From the Plan and establishment of priorities, the City can establish an annual budget. Seek funding and

develop projects accordingly to eliminate the items known and identified in the Plan. The act of addressing the

noncompliant items will involve multiple departments working together to dynamically update and populate the

spreadsheets provided to the City.

PROJECT APPROACH

Following an initial meeting with the City, it was understood that the approach to this report should take into

consideration the enormous task required to achieve compliance with the ADA. The program, as presented, places a

hierarchy upon the information collected, evaluated, and developed through its goals to ensure a workable and

obtainable plan. Therefore, consideration is given to alternative methods for achieving and sustaining accessibility

through certain provisions allowed within Title II of the ADA.

Title II provides governmental entities certain provisions which allow alternative measures in meeting the ADA

Standards due to their limited resources. Safe Harbor, Undue Burden and Disproportionality are three examples of

these provisions which are discussed in more detail later in this report. These provisions are considered within this

report; however, noncompliance issues were listed as they were observed. Implementation of some of these

provisions will require the City’s due diligence to provide proof of need, while others can be considered as needed.

Phase 1 – Self-Evaluation

The noncompliance items were identified through field surveys conducted for both the Primary and Secondary

Goals. These surveys provided in-depth reviews of the public right-of-way access routes, parking spaces, and the

path of travel to and within facilities. The process was laborious and time consuming due to the detailed field work

which utilized checklists and specialty tools to identify and evaluate numerous design elements such as curb ramps,

sidewalks, doorways and restrooms.

The surveys for each goal differed slightly and are briefly described below.

Primary Goal – Rights-of-Way:

The field surveys for the Primary Goal were conducted in two phases. First, a drive-by survey was performed to

scope the public rights-of-way, providing an initial review to determine if more information is needed. If additional

information was needed, a second onsite, feet-to-the-ground, survey was performed to gather more accurate and

detailed data.

The drive-by surveys provided a brisk method for identifying and locating possible noncompliant issues. To assist in

the location of the issues, maps were developed locating the selected FFCS public rights-of-way, see below, for use

in determining the scope of the onsite surveys. In addition, a numbering system was applied to each roadway in an

east to west, and south to north sequence to further locate issues found.

` FFCS Public Rights-of-Way Map

(Reference Attachment 6)

5 | P a g e

The onsite right-of-way surveys consisted of walking the public access routes to identify and document the

noncompliant items found. Obstructions affecting access within on-site parking spaces and along curb ramps,

sidewalks, and pedestrian street crossings were evaluated to determine compliance. Once found their locations were

noted together with the infraction on the roadway’s checklist and photographed.

The data collected during the surveys was transferred from the checklists and populated onto their respective

Evaluation Spreadsheets. These spreadsheets organization included the infraction’s location, PROWAG section

number, noncompliance issue, quantities, identification photograph and any comments if necessary. The

spreadsheets provide a medium for each roadway’s review, and information necessary for correctional development

in Phase 2.

Secondary Goal – Facilities:

The on-site surveys for the Secondary Goals were performed for the selected public facilities which include

buildings, recreational facilities, parks and open spaces. (Reference Attachments 7 through 9 for maps locating each

of the public facilities.) Each facility was reviewed with the aid of site and floor plans, when available, to ensure all

accessible areas were included within the survey. Noncompliant issues were identified and documented for most all

facilities, public or not, for evaluation purposes.

As similarly noted with the public rights-of-way, the data collected within the surveys was transferred to the

facility’s respective Evaluation Spreadsheets. Each spreadsheet listed the section number of the ADA Standard used

in the evaluation, noncompliance issue, quantiles, photograph, and comments, if any. These spreadsheets provided a

medium to review each facility and contained the information necessary for correctional development in Phase 2.

Unlike the rights-of-way, the facilities were reviewed according to the ADA Standards corresponding to their date of

construction or alteration. The date the facility was constructed or altered determined which Standard was used to

assess its compliance. This was performed to identify the design elements which met the requirements of the 1991

Standards in the form of a Safe Harbor. (Safe Harbor is described in more detail later in this report.)

The dates and corresponding standards are as follows:

Date Standards Used

Before January 1992 2010 Standards

January 1992 – September 2010 1991 Standards

September 2010 – March 2012 1991 Standards

After March 2012 2010 Standards

Facilities constructed prior to the implementation of the 1991 Standards were reviewed by the 2010 Standards.

These facilities are considered to be noncompliant and must be updated unless an Undue Burden can be proved and

documented. (Undue burden is described in more detail later in this report.)

Phase 2 – Transition Plan

In this phase, the information accumulated within Phase 1 underwent further evaluation to provide recommended

corrections to obtain PROWAG and ADA compliance. In addition, the Plan was developed into a database and an

instrument for implementing the work. The correctional recommendations provide an itemized scope of work. This

scope typically consists of removing and replacing noncompliant items with complaint items. Budget costs are a

result of the scope and priorities are based upon achieving access and safety.

Budget costs correspond to the scope and type of work, and its quantity. Budget costs were developed through

estimates provided for typical or standard details found throughout the project. Their purpose is to help develop an

approximate budget as not all details or conditions are the same. In this case the laws of averages were applied since

work in some areas will be more extensive than others. What is not considered within the budget costs are

unforeseen or unknown circumstances. That is drainage issues, right-of-way conflicts, structural or building code

issues, for example, are not included in these costs due to the unknown criteria associated those items. Therefore,

they were not considered in the assessment or in the correctional scope of work. However, these issues should be

considered by the design professional during the design phase of the correctional work.

6 | P a g e

There are priority differences between the PROWAG and the ADA. Priorities within the PROWAG are determined

based on the ability to provide accessible pathways, in addition to providing safe areas for pedestrian protection,

such as curb ramps at intersections. This stands to reason due to the close proximity of public rights-of-way to

vehicular traffic. The ADA, however, provides a prescribed list of priorities for facilities based upon access to and

within a facility.

In addition to the priorities mentioned above, priorities or levels of importance also play an important role in the

determination of the grouping and/or the location of projects. Popular areas within the City which receive high

pedestrian activity are considered in the levels of importance. Other issues of consideration include input from the

City, ADA Transition Plan Steering Committee, and members of the community. The City and the Steering

Committee can provide additional guidance and direction with their feedback to ensure the Plan is tailored to their

needs and requirements. Priorities are discussed in more detail later in this report.

Primary Goal – Rights-of-Way:

Transition Plan spreadsheets (reference Attachment 11) for each roadway public right-of-way were populated from

data acquired in Phase 1. Like the Evaluation Spreadsheets each item references a PROWAG section number and its

issue, but also includes additional columns for suggested corrections, priority, cost code, budget cost and completion

dates. Correctional recommendations are noted and the budget costs and priorities are applied for each item. The

budget costs were totaled reflecting the work required on that particular roadway. The completion date column is to

be used when the correction has been made.

Secondary Goal – Facilities:

Similar to the rights-of-way, data from the evaluation spreadsheets were transferred onto the Transition Plan

spreadsheet for each facility. All facilities evaluated for correction were done so according to the 2010 Standards,

regardless of the standard used for evaluation. Similar to the evaluation spreadsheets, each item references an ADA

Standards section number and its issue, but also includes columns for suggested corrections, priority, cost code,

budget cost and completion dates. As noted in the Primary Goal above, correctional recommendations are noted and

the budget costs and priorities are applied for each item. The budget costs were totaled reflecting the work required

on that particular facility. The completion date column is to be used when the correction has been made.

Similar to the primary goal, the noncompliant items were developed further, with each item being reviewed

according to its description and a recommendation for correction was applied, along with a cost code and budget

cost. The budget costs were added up for each noncompliant item for a total budget cost for that particular facility.

Priorities were set according to the recommended four priorities mentioned above. The completion date column is to

be used when the correction has been made.

The City will be provided an electronic copy of each of the rights-of-way and facilities Transition Plan spreadsheets

in EXCEL and PDF format for use to manage, monitor, and track the status of each item, allowing the City to

manage current and future accessibility issues, update the deficiency status, and generate reports to show progress in

meeting the Transition Plan.

7 | P a g e

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

This Self-Evaluation and Transition Plan references only those pedestrian pathways within rights-of-way and

facilities that do not meet the minimum ADA Standards for accessibility. Those which meet the ADA Standards are

not mentioned or referenced in this report.

Pascagoula has been in the process of upgrading and enhancing many of its roadways and facilities within the

downtown area, along the downtown river front, the beach, as well as other areas throughout the City, improving the

quality of life for its citizens. In addition, right-of-way upgrades have accompanied new construction within other

areas of the city. Many of the rights-of-way and facilities were found to meet the ADA accessibility standard, with a

few exceptions. The majority of Pascagoula’s older public rights-of-way and facilities were found to have some

degree of noncompliance and these are the areas of primary concern and focus for accessing the primary and

secondary goals.

Primary Goal – Rights-of-Way

As mentioned, many of the older pedestrian pathways within the rights-of-way either did not exist or were found to

be noncompliant according to the PROWAG standards. The noncompliance issues were found primarily with curb

ramps, sidewalks and pedestrian street crossings. These noncompliant issues were possibly the result of

design/construction standards that have since been updated, traffic and normal wear and tear over the life of the

item, and/or environmental impact.

There were a few noncompliant issues found with newer construction related to material movement caused by the

temperature, rain, flooding, storm events or other weather conditions.

Noncompliant issues found within the public rights-of-way consisted of, but were not limited to, the following: lack

of curb ramps, noncompliant curb ramps, excessive slopes, narrow widths, no detectable warnings, no pedestrian

street crossings, non-accessible on-street parking, non-accessible driveway crossings, damaged sidewalks, excessive

change in elevation, and clearance restrictions due to plants, trees, signs, etc., to name a few. In some cases, the

noncompliance was exacerbated due to utility conflicts or narrow right-of-way limitations/restrictions which

contributed to obstructions or conflicts.

Below are some examples of common noncompliant issues found throughout the City.

Noncompliance examples:

The photo to the left is of a 3’-0” wide sidewalk that needs to be enlarged

to the 5’-0” recommended width, per MDOT (4’-0” minimum required). It

is restricted on both sides by the retaining wall on the left and the power

poles on the right. Right-of-way may also restrict improvements. Right-of-

way restrictions will be common with most improvements noted along the

roadways.

8 | P a g e

The photo to the right is of a sidewalk which has cross slopes in excess of

2%, excessive vertical changes in elevation, vegetation encroachment and

improper driveway cuts which segment the sidewalk, resulting in

discontinuous pathways.

The photo to the left is of a street intersection with curb

ramps and crosswalks. The curb ramp shown is crowded

with utility and traffic light poles, equipment and access

boxes. In addition, there are excessive vertical changes in

elevation at the edge of the street and pavement and the

access boxes, no detectable warning, the crosswalk striping

is faded to area of refuge/landing, and transition slopes are

excessive.

The photo to the right shows a crosswalk without curb ramps and

continuous sidewalks. There is a sidewalk noted just beyond the traffic

light pole in the foreground, but it is overgrown with vegetation and less

than 5’-0” wide. The installation of a curb ramp here may present some

issues with potential conflicts with drainage, utilities, and rights-of-way.

The photo to the left is of recent work where the brick

pavers have settled, creating issues with excessive elevation

change.

9 | P a g e

Secondary Goal – Facilities

Much like any city, Pascagoula has a large inventory of facilities serving different functions of civic life and

municipal services. As addressed earlier, these consist of facilities/buildings, recreation facilities, parks and open

spaces. This report consists of surveys for those facilities as selected by the City, whether public or not. Many of

these facilities are dated, with minimal improvements taking place over the past 15 to 20 years.

In most cases, noncompliant issues found were in facilities constructed in the 1970s and 1980s, prior to the ADA.

Therefore, unless renovated according to the 1991 Standards, these facilities are noncompliant and must be corrected

according to the 2010 Standards. However, some allowances are provided should corrections of the noncompliant

issues cause an undue burden on the City. These are explained in further detail below.

Common noncompliant items found in facilities constructed after January 1992 and later consisted of the lack of van

accessible parking, access to the facility (excessive elevation and cross slope), signage, noncompliant restroom

accessories, approach clearances at doors, door hardware, and excessive counter heights, to name a few. In addition,

furniture placement in some facilities provided a hindrance to accessibility. Outdoor facilities had various degrees of

noncompliance generally relating to parking and access (raised joints in concrete walks, unstable surfaces, etc.)

within the facility.

The photo to the left shows a sidewalk within the right-of-way of a busy

street which has several businesses. The sidewalk is interrupted frequently

for parking access to these businesses, resulting in sidewalks which have

excessive side slopes, changes in elevation and are often crowded with

utilities. In addition, the photo shows no curb ramps, crosswalks,

pedestrian controls, and possible height clearance issues for pedestrians

due to signage locations.

This photo to the right shows the restricted sidewalk

clearance due to vehicles extending into the sidewalk clear

space due to the lack of wheel stops. This condition also

presents a safety concern with pedestrians, particularly small

children, the elderly and those in wheelchairs.

10 | P a g e

Below are some examples of common noncompliant issues found throughout the City.

Noncompliance examples (Facilities/Buildings):

The photo to the left is an example of a noncompliant

handicap parking space and access aisle. There is no van

parking, the signage is too low, and there is a ramp located

within the access aisle.

The photograph to the right shows a handrail which has a noncompliant

gripping surface and the handrail does not extend 12” beyond the lower

stair thread.

The photograph to the left shows a noncompliant toilet stall.

The partition width is less than the 5’-0” required, the toilet

is incorrectly located, and the grab bars and toilet paper

dispenser are not in the proper locations.

The photograph to the right shows a building that is not

accessible. There is no accessible parking, no ramp, and the

door’s opening and closing force does not meet the required

standards. It was noted this entrance door is difficult to open

for most anyone.

11 | P a g e

The photograph to the left shows door hardware which is noncompliant,

preventing an individual with grasping disabilities from unlatching and

opening the door

The photograph to the right shows a noncompliant ramp. The

ramp exceeds the required 1:12 slope and there are no

compliant handrails. This ramp shall be monitored by the

City as the wood deck boards over time may exceed the ¼”

vertical change in elevation tolerance.

The photograph to the left shows a noncompliant ramp which exceeds the

required 1:12 slope and does not have the required 5’-0” by 5’-0” turning

radius.

To the right is shown the entrance to a restroom where the

change in elevation exceeds the maximum ¼” allowed.

12 | P a g e

Noncompliance examples: (Recreation Facilities)

The drinking fountain to the left protrudes into the path of travel and can be

a hindrance to individuals with impaired vision.

The photo to the left shows no accessible route to the bleacher

area or seating areas for wheelchair bound individuals. In

addition, the asphalt paving has a cross slope that exceeds

2%.

The photograph to the right shows restricted access to the

concession area, non-accessible concession counters, and

restricted access to thecounters with an unprotected ±4” drop

into a drainage swale.

The photograph to the left shows a common issue with an

excessive change in elevation in the sidewalk joints. The issue

can also occur at cracks and broken areas within the sidewalk.

13 | P a g e

The examples shown above are samples of some of the issues discovered within the surveys. For additional

information and a comprehensive listing of each right-of-way and facility, refer to the Transition Plan spreadsheets

(Attachment 11).

RECOMMENDATIONS:

Timeline for Corrections

Bringing items noted in the report into compliance will take time; it will be an ongoing process which will take

years to complete as dictated by the level of priority goals established and available funds.

The process for prioritizing the corrective work should be based upon a few of factors – their use, degree of

noncompliance, and the availability of funding. Because funding is not always immediately available, the timeline

and the priorities for corrective action will be dynamic, subject to multiple adjustments.

Due to the amount of work necessary to correct the noncompliant rights-of-way and facility issues, priorities are

established to subdivide the work into achievable goals. The goals for completing the corrective work should be

subdivided into immediate, short and long range goals.

Immediate goals should consist of maintenance items and temporary corrections that can be accomplished quickly

with minimal expense. Short range goals, work to be initialized and completed within the first two-year period,

should parallel the first priority. Long range goals, work beyond the two year period, should parallel the subsequent

priorities with the understanding these goals may need to be adjusted based on current needs and priorities.

Priorities

There are several factors which need to be considered in priority development. As mentioned above, the timeline for

corrections should be separated into goals that correspond to the use and the degree of compliance. Uses may vary in

importance depending upon the services provided and the location of those services. The quantity of services

The photograph to the right shows a non-accessible bench

and grill.

This photo to the left shows a walking path using wood mulch as its

surface. The mulch is uneven in places, providing a nonstable surface in

addition to excessive elevation change in areas

14 | P a g e

concentrated within a certain area, and/or the greater their importance, corresponds to an increased use of the paths-

of-travel to those services, and the higher the use, the higher the priority.

Immediate goals for both the rights-of-way and facilities, as described in more detail in the Self-Performed section

below, can be achieved using City staff and resources to remove certain barriers that limit access or present safety

hazards. Short and long term goals are described in more detail below.

Phase 1 – Rights-of-Way:

As mentioned in the Summary of Findings, Pascagoula has been providing rights-of-way and facility upgrades

within certain areas of the City. One prominent area is in downtown Pascagoula where a high concentration of City,

County, and business services exist. The City has already corrected several roadway intersections consisting of

pedestrian street crossings and curb ramps. Because of the density of the public services, it is recommended that the

right-of-way upgrades be expanded to include the sidewalks, and from the downtown area into the City.

Referencing the Rights-of-Way Estimated Budget Cost Summary (Attachment 1), priorities have been identified for

each roadway right-of-way based upon their use and location. In addition, sub-priorities such as curb ramps, on-

street parking, pedestrian street crossings and sidewalks have been identified on the Rights-of-Way Transition Plan

spreadsheets (Attachment 11) according to importance of achieving accessible paths-of-travel. Together they dictate

the estimated budget cost based on the scope-of-work necessary for correction.

Referencing the goals listed within the Timeline for Correction above, the first priority was associated with the short

term goal, and the lower priorities were associated with long term goals. These priorities/goals can be broken down

further according to the funding available, allowing for phased corrections. A portion of a roadway may decrease in

priority the further it is from downtown, and/or work within that roadway’s rights-of-way adjusted according its sub-

priorities. For example, work already accomplished in the City’s downtown was phased, correcting accessibility to

sidewalks, but not the sidewalks.

A listing of the roadways and their associated priorities are as follows:

Level 1 (Short Term): Level 2 (Long Term): Level 3 (Long Term):

Krebs Avenue Telephone Road Highway 90

Beach Boulevard Old Mobile Highway Orchard Road

Jackson/Watts Avenue Ingalls Avenue Shortcut Road

Convent Avenue 14th

Street East Taylor Avenue

Frederic Street Hospital Road Pine Street

Magnolia Street Chicot Street Eden Street

Canty Street Tucker Avenue Martin Street

Pascagoula Street Washington Avenue

Market Street Jerry St. Pe’ Highway (South)

Lake Avenue

The estimated budget costs for the priorities are as follows:

Level 1: $ 5,732,638.00

Level 2: $ 3,152,937.00

Level 3: $ 2,147,468.00

Total: $11,033,043.00

Referencing the Rights-of-Way Estimated Budget Cost Breakdown (Attachment 2), the sub-priorities, or accessible

elements, the estimated budget costs are as follows:

Curb Ramps: $ 891,070.00

Sidewalks: $ 9,716,495.00

Pedestrian Street Crossing: $ 310,928.00

On-Street Parking: $ 23,350.00

Other: $ 91,200.00

Total: $11,033,043.00

15 | P a g e

Phase 2 – Facilities:

As mentioned under the Summary of Findings, the City has a large inventory of facilities which provide a variety of

services for the community. The evaluation survey revealed that there were basically four categories of public use

ranging from frequent use to no use at all. In order to establish priorities for their correction the first priority was

associated with the higher use facility. Additionally, sub-priorities have been identified on each facility’s Transition

Plan spreadsheet (Attachment 11) according to importance as listed within the ADA Standards. Together they

dictate the estimated budget cost based on the scope-of-work necessary for correction.

Regarding the short term and long term goals, as discussed within the Timeline for Correction above and as stated

within the rights-of-way, the first priority is associated with the short term goal, and the lower priorities are

associated with the long term goals. These priorities, as with all other priorities, can be accomplished in stages

according to need and funding available.

A listing of each facility and their associated priority is as follows:

Level 1 (Short Term): Level 2 (Long Term):

City Hall Community Development

Utilities Scranton Museum

Police Department Central Fire Station

Library Old Train Depot

Senior Center Police Training Academy

Code Enforcement Public Works offices

16 Cottages Anola Club

Andrew Johnson Recreation Center Parking Garage

Pascagoula Recreation Center Parks and Open Spaces

Recreation Facilities

Level 3 (Long Term): Level 4 (Not Used):

Water Treatment Plants Misc. Warehouse/Storage

Bayou Casotte Fire Station Misc. Maintenance Facilities

Lake Avenue Fire Station

Animal Control

E Office Building

Sub-priorities (accessible elements) as provided by the ADA Standards are listed as follows:

1. Accessible approach and entrance

2. Access to goods and services

3. Restrooms

4. Other measures necessary

The estimated budget cost for each facility is found by referencing the following sheets: Public Facilities,

Recreation Facilities, and Parks and Open Spaces Estimated Budget Cost Summaries (Attachments 3, 4 and 5,

respectively). From these summary sheets, we find the estimated budget costs as follows:

Public Facilities: $ 445,400.00

Recreation Facilities: $ 395,880.00

Parks and Open Spaces: $ 501,520.00

Total: $1,342,800.00

16 | P a g e

Refining the Scope of Work

The correction of noncompliance issues can be extremely challenging and costly. Pascagoula, as with many other

cities, has several facilities within its inventory which were constructed prior to January 1992. Therefore, these

facilities do not meet the ADA Standards and must be corrected or dealt with in an acceptable manner to ensure

compliance to the latest 2010 Standards. This can be extremely burdensome due to the order of magnitude and

complexity required to correct the physical barriers. Many local governments lack the proper funding and manpower

to accomplish this goal in a timely manner. Therefore, the ADA provides some leeway within Title II to achieve

compliance.

Other than requiring all new construction meet the current ADA Standards – an obvious requirement, alterations to

existing facilities are provided certain allowances and/or exceptions in meeting the standards. Three examples of

these are Safe Harbor, Undue Burden and Disproportionality.

Safe Harbor:

Safe Harbor is a term used meaning the temporary acceptance of an item provided it meets a previous standard. As

mentioned within the Project Approach section, if a facility was constructed within the time constraints for the 1991

Standards and meets those standards today then no action is necessary, for the time being. It does not mean no other

action is required. That is ‘grandfathering’ and grandfathering is not acceptable or recognized by the Department of

Justice. However, if the scope of new alterations includes facilities that met the 1991 Standards, those facilities must

be included in the alterations and updated to the 2010 Standards.

Undue Burden:

Undue Burden means significant difficulty or expense. Depending on the circumstances, a public entity can take

limited action or no action if the City can demonstrate that making the modifications would fundamentally alter the

nature of the program or activity, cause undue financial and administrative burdens, or is structurally impracticable.

In such cases, the City must still make provisions through accommodations or other means to ensure individuals

with disabilities are not discriminated against.

For example, the restrooms within the Code Offices are not accessible. To bring these restrooms up to the 2010

Standards would require the removal of both restrooms and the construction of a single Unisex restroom. If this

alteration places an undue burden upon the City, the City could declare the existing restrooms nonpublic and install

signage stating ‘No Public Restrooms.’ Should a current employee within the facility become handicapped, then the

City has an obligation to provide an accessible accommodation for that individual either by relocating them to an

accessible facility or another acceptable manner to ensure accessibility.

Disproportionality:

Disproportionality relates to the proportional cost of the overall alteration to the cost of meeting the accessibility

requirements within that alteration. If the cost for accessibility upgrades exceeds 20% of the overall alteration cost,

the cost is deemed disproportionate. Therefore, the path of travel to the altered portion of the facility is to be made

accessible, but only to the extent it can be made without incurring disproportionate costs. This can be accomplished

by ensuring that certain accessible elements are included in the work according to their priority.

Self Performed Work

In cases where funds are not available for permanent corrections, temporary corrections can be made to improve

accessibility. Some of these temporary corrections may not necessarily meet the PROWAG or ADA Standards, but

they would be an improvement over the existing conditions which could eliminate a safety hazard and suffice until

funding is available for permanent corrections. Examples of this work are outlined below.

Maintenance:

Maintenance is a vital part of becoming and remaining compliant. Many of the noncompliant issues found were in

part, due to the lack of maintenance. Since it is impossible for the City to replace all noncompliant public rights-of-

ways and facilities, it is best to maintain and keep the existing in good, useable condition. Many of the corrections

17 | P a g e

can be done in house with City personnel; however, they need to be familiar with the proper ADA guidelines and

standards. Examples of the noncompliant findings that can be corrected through maintenance are as follows:

Changes in Elevation:

Excessive changes in elevation were frequently found at the transition of curb

ramps to street crossings, along sidewalks at utility accesses, and joints within the

sidewalks. Grinding or cutting the raised portion of the sidewalk can alleviate most

of these issues. Otherwise, replacing a section of the sidewalk may be necessary.

Unstable Path of Travel:

An unstable path of travel can take different forms, from damaged or broken concrete sections within a sidewalk,

loose and uneven wood chips along a walking path, bare ground with exposed tree roots, or uneven ground or soft

grassy areas between sidewalks and playgrounds, benches, and/or ballpark bleachers. Correction of these issues may

consist of the replacement of concrete sidewalk sections, routine maintenance to the wood chips to ensure a smooth

and stable surface, and ensuring ground and grass areas are solid and stable with smooth transitions between hard

surfaces.

Overgrown Vegetation:

Overgrown trees, bushes, and ground cover were frequently found, limiting the clearances within the path of travel.

Some areas were found to be very difficult for a disabled person to navigate through. Therefore, routine maintenance

to keep the access ways clear is very important.

Furniture Location:

Another item found to limit access was the placement of furniture. These were

primarily located within the work areas of City offices, but were also found in

public places. The ADA Standards require that common use circulation paths

within work areas shall be accessible. In several cases, we found furniture

placement which narrowed the path of travel under 36”, provided an obstruction

within the path of travel, and restricted the proper access clearances to a door.

Another issue found was the location of wheelchair space within a common seating area. These of course can be

corrected by the relocation and repositioning of the furniture, and providing proper signage where necessary.

Minor Repairs:

The survey identified several minor repair items which can be easily corrected within the facilities. These consist of,

but are not limited to, signage, door opening and closing force, improper door hardware, restroom accessory

locations, and relocation of protruding objects or barrier/railing installation to eliminate the hindrance. To perform

proper maintenance, City employees will need the use of certain tools to verify compliance such as a smart level,

door pressure gauge and other measurement devices.

Education

The ADA Coordinator should be the individual who oversees, organizes and directs the education process for the

City of Pascagoula. City employees who are involved in policy making and/or in the management of employees

should be educated and well versed with the aspects or titles of the ADA which correspond to their particular line of

work. The City must ensure each policy regarding the management of its employees, and relationships with the

public take into consideration the rights of those individuals with disabilities.

Employees associated with right-of-way and facility planning, review and supervision should also be educated and

well versed in the ADA Standards and PROWAG standards according to their respective duties. The understanding

of these standards will help ensure compliance through their knowledge to identify and provide correction, if

required, to noncompliant issues.

18 | P a g e

The Unified Development Code needs to be reviewed to ensure each element of public access meets or exceeds the

requirements of the ADA Standards and PROWAG, including, but not limited to, parking, curb ramps, sidewalks,

crosswalks, pedestrian signals, facility access, and restrooms. In addition, the ADA Coordinator should be included

in the review process for each right-of-way and facility proposed for new construction and alteration.

The ADA Coordinator should interact and assist all departments within the City to ensure the ADA policies and

procedures are met, assist with their needs, and that proper education is provided. Education develops awareness,

and the more aware one is of issues concerning the disabled, the more likely they will be identified and corrected.

Policies

Policies and procedures regarding the handling of various individual and community needs, City government

operations, etc., should be provided in written form and provided for the public, if requested. The following policies

should be reviewed by the ADA Coordinator and adopted by the City to ensure compliance:

1. Effective Communication:

a. 9-1-1 and TDD Systems.

b. Assistance to the hearing impaired (hearing devices, sign language).

c. Assistance to the vision impaired (braille, reading assistance).

d. Interpreters.

e. Internet, television, radio, flyers, community information boards, etc.

f. Accessible signage.

2. Program Accessibility:

a. Accommodation requests.

b. Program or service relocation.

c. City facilities for rent or lease.

3. Grievances.

4. Employee accessibility.

5. Historically significant facilities.

6. Accessibility during construction.

7. Local Laws, Ordinances, and Regulations:

a. Policies, practices, and procedures when when dealing with disabled persons.

b. Zoning variances to allow physical accessibility.

c. Policies to allow service animals.

PROJECT SUMMARY

This Self-Evaluation and Transition Plan identifies and exposes the variations of accessibility discrimination and

provides recommendations for their correction. It identifies the non-accessible barriers and provides an analysis and

recommended means for their correction, and it provides a mechanism for the City to review its compliance status;

an overview, if you will, that can be used as a guide in the decision making process.

When viable efforts are provided by municipalities to become compliant, the Department of Justice has a tendency

to work with those municipalities in that accomplishment, versus providing strict requirements to ensure compliance

when no plan is in place or no effort is being taken to achieve compliance. Therefore, it is the City’s responsibility to

ensure ADA compliance is an ongoing effort and carried out within its boundaries; as the saying goes, “to have a

plan and work the plan”.

There are several benefits to the Self-Evaluation and Transition Plan:

• It locates and identifies accessibility barriers.

• It provides recommended corrections for the non-accessible barriers.

• It provides a database prioritized according to need and cost.

• It educates by teaching what is compliant and noncompliant.

• It is a tool used to continually log and track projects, and compliance status.

19 | P a g e

The purpose of this Plan is to provide an organized method for achieving compliance, and the documentation

thereof. The Plan does not specify the details of correction, or provide a set of construction documents, for their

remediation, as there are typically other design issues to be considered. It does, however, provide a database of

information necessary for the development of construction projects required to achieve compliance.

As stated, the goal of ADA is to eliminate discrimination to the disabled by ensuring all public pedestrian rights-of-

way and facilities are accessible. As this Self-Evaluation and Transition Plan is executed, its benefits will promote

pedestrian safety and improve access along public paths of travel, within public facilities, and inclusion of the

disabled community within the City's civic life.

CONCLUSION

The findings within this report are extensive and will require years to complete. Therefore, the work is broken down

into achievable means to successfully eliminate noncompliance within the City. Levels of importance are presented

within this report listing recommended priorities for phasing projects. The comprehensive list of the noncompliant

items within the Transition Plan (Attachment 11) provides the scope for project development and estimated budget

costs for funding purposes. With assistance from the City’s masterplan, further direction in completing this work can

be achieved.

Where correctional work is complicated due to other issues such as drainage concerns, restrictive rights-of-way, or

facilities constructed prior to the ADA standards, decisions need to be made to determine the feasibility of updating

those facilities and to what capacity they should be updated. If unfeasible, documentation must be developed to

prove undue burden and accommodations made to ensure accessibility. If new facilities are considered within the

City’s masterplan to replace the old, they need to be incorporated into that documentation.

The contents of this Plan will require constant review as the needs of the City change, thus requiring the City staff to

keep management abreast of those changes as the Plan is intended to be a living tool used in the elimination of

discrimination against the disabled. As part of this report, CE will provide the documents necessary for the City to

manage the Plan.

Compton Engineering is available should the City need assistance with planning and providing design and

construction services for its implementation.

20 | P a g e

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

City of Pascagoula’s ADA Policy Statement:

The City of Pascagoula does not discriminate on the basis of disability in admission to, access to, or operations of its

programs, services, or activities on the basis of disability in its hiring or employment practices. This notice is

provided as required by the Disabilities Act of 1990. Questions, concerns, complaints, or requests for additional

information regarding the ADA may be forwarded to the ADA Coordinator.

The City of Pascagoula is committed to the ADA and its fundamental goal of providing disabled community

members access to an active life. To the extent that any facility is not accessible to individuals with disabilities, the

City of Pascagoula will make reasonable accommodations to assure that those with disabilities will have access to

any services, programs, or public meetings offered by the City.

City of Pascagoula ADA Coordinator:

Valerie Moore, Director of Human Resources (228-938-6602)

The ADA Coordinator provides assistance and information to individuals with disabilities and to the organizations

representing those with disabilities. The Coordinator is designated to receive complaints, grievances and requests for

the removal of barriers that prohibit accessibility to any of the facilities, services, or programs offered by the City of

Pascagoula; investigates complaints and reports; coordinates continuing education; coordinates efforts to remove

barriers to accessibility; assists and coordinates the efforts to make reasonable accommodations where necessary;

and reports the need for modifications, construction, reconstruction and accommodation to the appropriate City

department.

City of Pascagoula Grievance Procedure:

Any person believing that such access is not available in Pascagoula should contact the City's ADA Coordinator. A

copy of the Grievance Procedure form is found within this report (see Attachment 10) and on the City’s

Accessibility website.

City of Pascagoula Accessibility Contact Information:

Website: www.cityofpascagoula.com

Accessibility website: www.cityofpascagoula.com/285/Accessibility

TDD/TTY services are available by calling 228-762-2211.

Language/Translation Services are available by calling 228-762-2211 or 911 for emergencies.

21 | P a g e

RESOURCES

ADA Southeast Center Contact Information:

1419 Mayson Street NE

Atlanta, GA 30324

Website: www.adasoutheast.org

Phone: 404-541-9001

800-949-4232 – Southeast only

United States Department of Justice – Civil Rights Division Contact Information:

U.S. Department of Justice

950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Civil Rights Division

Disability Rights Section – NYA

Washington, DC 20530

ADA Information Line: 800-514-0301 (voice) or 800-514-0383 (TTY)

ADA website: www.ada.gov/index.html

Funding Sources:

Mississippi Development Authority

https://www.mississippi.org/home-page/business-services/community-development/community-services/

community-services/

Mississippi Department of Transportation

www.mdot.ms.gov

Grants.gov

www.grants.gov

Reconnecting America: Federal Grant Opportunities

www.reconnectingamerica.org/resource-center/federal-grant-opportunities/

Fair Housing Assistance Program (FHAP)

https://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program_offices/fair_housing_equal_opp/partners/FHAP

U.S. Department of Transportation, Grant Opportunities.

www.transportation.gov/grants

HUD Grant Opportunities

https://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program_offices/spm/gmomgmt/grantsinfo/fundingopps