Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Comment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
California Council of the Blind asks Sacramento DAC to revisit Sutter's Landing ADA plan
Summary
At the Jan. 14 meeting the ACB Capitol chapter (represented by Regina) urged the commission to reconsider the city's Sutter's Landing ADA River Park Veil project, citing site-selection concerns and offering an alternate plan for consideration while the project is in early development.
Get email alerts on the Public Comment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
During public comment at the Sacramento Disability Advisory Commission meeting on Jan. 14, Regina, representing the ACB Capitol chapter of the California Council of the Blind, urged commissioners to re-examine the city's draft mitigated negative declaration for the Sutter's Landing ADA River Park Veil project and to consider an alternative plan put forward by the chapter and partners.
Regina read portions of a letter submitted to the city's senior planner and highlighted several concerns: the study did not explain why Sutter's Landing was chosen over other possible sites along the American River; factors such as scenic quality, quietness and interpretive signage for tactile, visual and auditory accessibility should be considered; and maintenance and monitoring plans for the trail should be detailed so people with disabilities can reliably enjoy the site.
"We are extremely appreciative of the city's willingness to undertake this project to establish a formalized ADA-compliant access path for recreational users," Regina said, but she added that the ACB Capitol chapter "oppose[s] the city's plan and would like to consider a different plan put forth by us and Bruce Foreman and several other partners." She asked the commission to explore the group's alternative while the project remains in development.
The commission thanked Regina for the comment and Chair Kramer said the commission would look further into the matter as the project moves forward. No SACRT or planning staff response appeared in the meeting record; commissioners acknowledged the public comment and noted it for follow-up.

