[Access] Survey (Revised)

[Mary Otten]

Hi David,Re question 28, why is   limited hearing mentioned in a
question  having to do with light. what is the connection? In the
questions about wheel-chair accessibility, you have some specific
guidelines regarding heights, position of grab bars etc. In the low
vision ones regarding light, there is nothing indicating what
constitutes adequate. I don't know if such standards exist, honestly.
but if they do, I think it would be good to include those as you have
specified things for accessibility for folks who use wheel-chairs.  I
also don't understand question 25 regarding venting printers fax
machines and computers to the outdoors> I've never heard of such a
thing. Maybe it could be taken out? Also in the question that asks
about all parts of a building being accessible to people who use
wheel-chairs, I think that should be revised to ask about whether all
parts of the building which will be used by the public. If this is the
check list we want people to consider when looking at outside rental
space, it is not relevant if certain parts that our people wouldn't use
are not accessible, e.g. maybe there are offices that don't have
accessible desks, but we won't be needing to use them.  

I think we could provide this list, minus the stuff about programs,
policies and practices, as the check list for folks looking to rent
outside facilities for church events, Tthe program practice and policy
part does not seem relevant for them, since they are considering
facilities, except the part about listening devices and amplification
systems  for the hearing impaired, so I think that should be included
in  the first part about the facility, not the part about the programs
etc.  

What would guidance under question 48 look like? My first reaction is
to say I don't even like that question. It feels like special
consideration. How would it be to ask does your congregation provide 
guidance for, say people of color, or women, or glbtq people in
services? Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but why should there be such
guidance and what would it look like?  

I would suggest moving question 46 to the first part as it has to do
with the facility, not a policy or program; its signage. 


Regarding alternative lighting, isn't there something about fluorescent
lighting, dimmer switches or some new kind of lighting or something
that makes them ok or at least better than they use to be. We just had
a discussion at the accessibility committee of the HRC on this topic,
but I don't remember the technical details. A fix is nontrivial. 



Sorry I'm late commenting on this. I'd love to hear what others think.
Mary