The status and impairment that I chose to address while doing the shopping center assessment was a patron of the store using a wheelchair. Hastings was the store that I assessed for accessibility, maneuverability, and safety using the Americans with Disabilities Act criteria. The following 13 categories represent the Accessibility Audit Requirements (Pierson & Fairchild, 2008).
Ramps and slopes:
The front entrance of the building did have an accessible slope from the road way to the sidewalk; however, it didn’t appear very safe. The measurements of the slope were, 41 inches long and 3 inches tall. It was not made of a smooth concrete, but rather it was made from asphalt. This made for a bumpy surface with uneven transitions that could be hazardous …show more content…
The two sets of double doors that allowed entrance into the building were heavy and would require a fair amount of upper extremity strength. A patron must first open the first set of double doors then turn sharp right to open the second set of double doors. This would not be ideal for a client in a wheelchair to maneuver independently. A second person would most likely be needed to hold one set of doors open for the client to be able to enter the building. This assistance could pose a safety risk if the client were trying to exit in a hurry.
Signage:
I didn’t recognize or notice any signs with braille on them. This would be a disadvantage if the client were blind. It would not be important for a client in a wheelchair.
Steps, stairs, and elevators:
The building is all one level and didn’t include any steps, stairs, or an elevator.
Flooring:
The building contained a combination of both smooth hard floors and low pile carpet. While in each area, maneuverability would not be a problem. However, the transitions between the hard floors and the carpet were less desirable. The rubber stripping was quite thick and created a bump. This could pose a problem with maneuverability and possibly a potential safety risk. The layout of the carpet and hard floor seemed sporadic and included a lot of these transitions (obstacles).
Obstacles and
Ramps and slopes:
The front entrance of the building did have an accessible slope from the road way to the sidewalk; however, it didn’t appear very safe. The measurements of the slope were, 41 inches long and 3 inches tall. It was not made of a smooth concrete, but rather it was made from asphalt. This made for a bumpy surface with uneven transitions that could be hazardous …show more content…
The two sets of double doors that allowed entrance into the building were heavy and would require a fair amount of upper extremity strength. A patron must first open the first set of double doors then turn sharp right to open the second set of double doors. This would not be ideal for a client in a wheelchair to maneuver independently. A second person would most likely be needed to hold one set of doors open for the client to be able to enter the building. This assistance could pose a safety risk if the client were trying to exit in a hurry.
Signage:
I didn’t recognize or notice any signs with braille on them. This would be a disadvantage if the client were blind. It would not be important for a client in a wheelchair.
Steps, stairs, and elevators:
The building is all one level and didn’t include any steps, stairs, or an elevator.
Flooring:
The building contained a combination of both smooth hard floors and low pile carpet. While in each area, maneuverability would not be a problem. However, the transitions between the hard floors and the carpet were less desirable. The rubber stripping was quite thick and created a bump. This could pose a problem with maneuverability and possibly a potential safety risk. The layout of the carpet and hard floor seemed sporadic and included a lot of these transitions (obstacles).
Obstacles and