T.

6/7/93

JUN 15 1993

Mr. Robert R. Wolting, City Manager

Fairbanks City Hall
Fairbanks, Alaska 99707

RE: Department of Justice Complaint Number X 1

Dear Mr. Wolting:

This letter constitutes the Department of Justice's Letter

of Findings with respect to the complaint filed with our office
under title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act [ADA]. The
complainant alleged that [1] a ramp designed to provide access to
the Municipal Utilities System Building [MUSB] located at 645 5th
Avenue does not comply with the requirements of title II; and
[2] the slope of the curb ramp to the sidewalk next to the MUSB
is too steep.

With reference to the first allegation, the complainant

stated that "[t]he railing attached to the side of the [MUSB]
does not run the full length of the ramp. The handrail on the
building begins six inches after the start of the ramp. The
handrail [attached to the building] ends five feet and five
inches prior to reaching the doorway." Additionally, the
complainant states that "[t]he city apparently wanted to beautify
the ramp, so they have placed three flower boxes at the top of
the ramp. This has seriously diminished the five foot turning
circle proscribed [sic] for patrons using wheelchairs." With
reference to the second allegation, the complainant asserted that
"[t]he ramp incorporated into the sidewalk leading from the
driveway to the building rises 5 3/4" in 13"."

Title II of the ADA prohibits discrimination against

qualified individuals with disabilities on the basis of their
disability in the services, programs, or activities of a local
government such as the city of Fairbanks. Our office enforces
the requirements of title II of the ADA, as applied to the issues
raised by the complainant, through investigation, negotiation,
and, if necessary, referral for possible litigation.
cc: Records CRS Chrono Friedlander Stewart.wolting3.lof

1 Formerly Department of Justice Complaint Number X

01-00045​ -2-

By a letter dated November 4, 1992, this office requested

information necessary to review the complainant's allegations.
In addition, we provided the city with a copy of our title II
regulation, 28 C.F.R. Part 35, our title II Technical Assistance
Manual, and the ADA Handbook. In a letter dated December 10,
1992, Mr. W.R. Scouten, a Project Engineer with the city's
Engineering Department, responded to our request for
information.

The Facts

The MUSB was constructed in 1959 and contains no programs,

services, or activities that receive Federal financial
assistance. The contract for the construction of the ramp to the
side of the MUSB was executed on September 20, 1991, and the
construction was paid for exclusively by State funds.
Construction began soon after the contract was signed. The city
relied upon the 1980 American National Standards Institute
Standards as a basis for the design of the ramp. The
installation of the ramp was part of an overall project to make
the services provided in the MUSB building accessible to
individuals with disabilities.

The city admitted that the handrail attached to the

building's side did not extend the whole length of the slope of
the ramp. Subsequently, on March 4, 1993, the city extended the
handrail for the whole length of the ramp's slope. In addition,
the city has removed the flower boxes located on the landing at
the top of the ramp.
 With respect to the curb ramp to the sidewalk from the
driveway next to the MUSB, the city generally admits that at the
time of the filing of the complaint on July 11, 1992, the rise
was around 5 3/4 inches for a curb ramp that was only thirteen
inches in length. Since both the curb ramp and the sidewalk were
in existence prior to the commencement of the building ramp
project, the city states that the curb ramp was not part of the
project to make the entrance-to the MUSB accessible. Before our
November 5, 1992, notification to the city of this
investigation,
the curb ramp was altered in August, 1992, so that it now has a
slope of 1:12 inches with a maximum of 1:10.

Legal Standards

With respect to facilities such as the ramp to the MUSB,

which was constructed prior to January 26, 1992, the effective
date of title II, the city's obligation is to "... operate each
service, program, or activity so that the service, program, or
activity, when viewed in its entirety, is readily accessible to
and usable by individuals with disabilities." 28 C.F.R.
​ 35.150[a]. This requirement for existing facilities is known
as "the program accessibility" standard. No particular design
standard such as the Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards

01-00046​ -3-

[UFAS] or the Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility

Guidelines for Buildings and Facilities [ADAAG] is required, as
long as the city provides program accessibility to the programs,
services, or activities in its facilities.

With respect to new construction of or alterations to

facilities that are begun after January 26, 1992, the effective
date of title II, a public entity is required to follow the
design standards of UFAS or ADAAG. See 28 C.F.R. 35.151.
Therefore, alterations such as the one to the curb ramp in
August 1992, must be done in a manner that complies with UFAS or ADAAG.

Issues and Analysis

Issue # 1: Whether access to the programs, services, and

activities located in the KUSB [i.e., program access] is
provided
by the ramp to the side of MUSB.

The requirements for program access in existing facilities

apply to the ramp at the side of MUSB because the ramp was
installed prior to the effective date of the title II
regulation. After initiation of our investigation, the city extended the
handrail and removed the flower pots from the landing of the
ramp. Therefore, it is our determination that the city is in
compliance with the program access requirements of title II with
respect to this ramp.

Issue # 2: Whether the August 1992 alteration to the curb

ramp complies with either UFAS or ADAAG.

The August 1992 alteration that the city made to the curb
ramp has an acceptable slope between 1:10 and 1:12 for a maximum
rise of 6 inches. This meets the requirements of ADAAG or UFAS
for slope during alterations. See ADAAG at 4.1.6[a][6][i] or
UFAS at § 4.1.6[4][a]. Therefore, the city is in compliance with
the new construction and alteration requirements of title II
with respect to the curb ramp.

Conclusion

The City of Fairbanks is in compliance with title II of the

ADA respect to the allegations investigated. This letter does
not address any other issues concerning the city's
compliance with title II.

under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 TJ. S.C. 552, we

may be required to release this letter and other correspondence and
records related to this complaint in response to a request from
a third party. Should we receive such a request, we will
safeguard, to the extent permitted by the Freedom of Information

01-00047
​ -4-
Act and the Privacy Act, the release of information that could
constitute an unwarranted invasion of the complainant's or
other's privacy.

We wish to thank Mr. Scouten for his valuable assistance in

resolving this matter. Should you have any questions concerning
this letter, please call Louis M. Stewart, the attorney assigned
to this case, at (202) 616-7779.

Sincerely,

Stewart B. Oneglia
Chief
Coordination and Review Section
Civil Rights Division

01-00048