How accessible are New Rochelle's city buildings? NYS comptroller releases audit
State Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli and the New York State Division of Local Government and School Accountability identified 171 accessibility components in New Rochelle city buildings that needed improvements. They released their report May 6.
The state recommended updating items like interior signs with raised lettering and Braille, wheelchair accessible lavatories in restrooms, elevator doors that reopen automatically when obstructed by an object or person, and more.
Physical accessibility has been an important aspect of public facilities since the federal Americans with Disabilities Act was passed in 1990. Title II of the ADA banned discrimination based on disability by state and local governments, including in their buildings.
In 2010, when the ADA Standard for Accessible Design was released, it established a set of requirements for newly designed local government facilities and accommodations. Structures built on or after March 15, 2012 had to comply with the regulations, further underscoring the importance of having accessible public facilities that accommodate people with disabilities or limited mobility.
The state report used the Standard for Accessible Design to 'help identify where New Rochelle city officials could consider taking additional steps to increase physical accessibility to programs and services.'
Overall, the state recommended 171 accessibility improvements out of a total 895 physical accessibility components that were examined across these four city-owned locations in New Rochelle:
The Hugh A. Doyle Senior Center located at 94 Davis Ave.
Fire Department Headquarters located at 90 Beaufort Place
City Court and Police located at 475 North Ave.
City Hall, located at 515 North Ave.
New Rochelle has reviewed the 171 improvements recommended by the state and said the city plans to start making updates right away. Things like adding Braille to signage and replacing door knobs could be updated 'immediately,' City Manager Wilfredo Melendez said in a letter responding to the report.
'The city of New Rochelle is committed to improving accessibility at all city-owned facilities,' Melendez said in the letter. 'We will continue to advance strategies for identifying and addressing potential accessibility barriers and make necessary changes to comply with the 2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design.'
The city said it plans to use the state's findings to continue making accessibility improvements in the coming years.
This article originally appeared on Rockland/Westchester Journal News: New Rochelle NY's city buildings need accessibility upgrades: state
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
7 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Man, 77, Reunites with the Class Ring He Lost on a Beach Over 55 Years Ago: 'It's in Marvelous Condition'
NEED TO KNOW A man was reunited with his Fordham University class ring after losing it over five decades ago Al DiStefano, 77, lost the ring in 1969 while hanging out on a beach in Long Island Long Island resident Dave Orlowski recently found the inscribed ring while scanning the local beach with his metal detector A man was recently reunited with his college class ring after losing it over five decades ago. Al DiStefano, 77, lost his Fordham class ring in the Long Island Sound while hanging out on a Cedar Beach pier in May 1969, per the New York Post. The then 21-year-old had paid $110 for the gold ring with a garnet stone and couldn't afford a replacement. 'It was a nice ring,' DiStefano told the Post. 'It was important to me. I probably should have spent a little more time looking for it.' Cut to over 55 years later, when Long Island, N.Y. resident Dave Orlowski was sweeping Cedar Beach with a metal detector. Orlowski told the Post he got what he called 'a good hit' on the detector, and began digging in sand in near waist-deep water. 'I was digging, digging, digging. When I pulled up the ring, I couldn't believe the size and condition,' Orlowski, 56, recalled. Orlowski, who has a collection of found gold and silver objects from the past 25 years, said he briefly considered keeping the item, estimating it could be worth around $2,000 due to the fact that it contained white gold palladium. Never miss a story — sign up for to stay up-to-date on the best of what PEOPLE has to offer, from celebrity news to compelling human interest stories. However, the career electrician said his wife, Denise, ultimately persuaded him to find the ring's original owner. 'She told me it would be bad karma to keep the ring since we had the name of the person inscribed,' he told the Post, adding, 'She asked me if I'd want my ring back in that situation, and that answered my question.' Orlowski ultimately located a Fordham Class of 1969 Facebook group, and he reached out to the group's administrator, Karen Manning, who helped connect him with DiStefano. 'David made me feel good about people again for going out of his way to try to find the owner,' Manning told the Post. DiStefano, a retired oncologist who now lives in Texas, was shocked when he learned his ring had been found. 'Once in a blue moon, I'd think about the ring having a nice life at the bottom of the Sound,' he told the Post. The PEOPLE Puzzler crossword is here! How quickly can you solve it? Play now! 'He [Orlowski] mailed it to me, and I got it less than a week later — it's in marvelous condition. I'm wearing it now. I figured I ought to make up for lost time,' he added. DiStefano also said that he has thanked Orlowski profusely and plans to send him some gifts from Texas to show his appreciation. Read the original article on People
Yahoo
6 hours ago
- Yahoo
Lindenberg: Sidewalks will make Manor Park more accessible, livable and safe
As a resident of Manor Park and a wheelchair user, I've followed the recent debate over proposed sidewalk installations in our neighbourhood with a mix of disbelief and frustration. The opposition, largely from residents on the affected streets, has characterized the addition of sidewalks as a threat to the community's 'character and charm.' But charm and tradition should never come at the cost of the accessibility, inclusion, walkability, and safety of the whole community. The City of Ottawa's Transportation Master Plan clearly prioritizes the upgrade of pedestrian infrastructure during road renewal. This isn't a fringe idea. It's policy — part of the strategic directions of the City of Ottawa's Official Plan. It's a recognition that good urbanism means prioritizing sustainable modes of transportation, that safety and accessibility for people who walk is more important than traffic flow of private cars. Livability for all residents – especially those of us who do not or cannot drive — is central. Sidewalks are not an aesthetic choice. They are a lifeline. My wife, who is in her 70s, and I depend on them daily to access local amenities, visit neighbours, and simply enjoy the city. Without sidewalks, especially during Ottawa's winters, our ability to safely navigate the neighbourhood is sharply limited. We're not alone. Parents with strollers, children walking to school, seniors, delivery personnel — all benefit from a safe, continuous sidewalk network. Opponents argue sidewalks will destroy the look and feel of the Manor Park area. Their lawn-sign slogan 'Don't pave paradise' is ironic, given the already excessively wide paved asphalt streets under discussion, present since the neighbourhood was built in 1949. The slogan is also not fact-based. The proposal would narrow the space for cars and create dedicated pedestrian space. When work is complete, roughly the same amount of paved surface will exist. Walkability and charm are not mutually exclusive. In fact, sidewalk infrastructure can enhance both. Studies consistently show that walkable communities are quieter, safer, healthier, and more desirable. Sidewalks increase property values and foster stronger social cohesion, inviting neighbours outside and connecting us to one another. That's what makes a city livable. Atending the recent city information session hosted by Coun. Rawlson King, I was disturbed by some attendees' behaviour. I heard cheering and jeering, interruptions, and outright condescension — especially when voices like mine tried to express support for accessibility and urban renewal. I've rarely encountered such an entitled tone from fellow citizens. One attendee stood up to question whether, since they had helped elect our city councillor, they could count on him to oppose or defer the sidewalk plan. Such a suggestion (even in the minority) runs counter to public service and the public good. City councillors and staff are charged with enacting long-term infrastructure improvements. The time for street-corner influence is past. Why anybody thought otherwise is beyond me. This project is already being implemented. Decisions about infrastructure and sidewalks are engineering, policy and procedural matters — especially when they touch on fundamental issues like accessibility, safety, and equitable public space. Ottawa's growing population needs infrastructure that supports active transportation, healthy aging, and climate resilience. Sidewalks are a basic part of that. It sets a terrible precedent if a vocal group of Manor Park residents can defer sidewalks on their streets, blocking a council-approved, city-wide policy that seeks to make our neighbourhoods more connected, more inclusive and safer for everyone. Let's not let one group squander this important opportunity to benefit generations to come out of fear of change or a misplaced nostalgia. Sidewalks may seem like a small thing to some, but for many of us, they are the difference between independence and isolation. Ottawa is Canada's capital city. The least we can do is build a city that reflects the values we claim to hold as a larger society: equity, accessibility, and a future that includes everyone — on both sides of the street. Mark Lindenberg is an Ottawa writer, editor and translator. Related Adam: City should just get on with building sidewalks in Manor Park Sherazi: Demonization leads to hateful attacks such as Monday's OC Transpo bus incident
New York Times
8 hours ago
- New York Times
What Can I Do About My Terrible Neighbor?
Q: I live in a co-op in Washington Heights. The neighbor directly below me passed away several years ago. Her grandson lived with her and remains in the apartment, though he does not own shares and is illegally living there. The unit has fallen to such neglect. We are now dealing with terrible smells and are infested with roaches and, we fear, rodents too. The building is offering a basic exterminating service, but it's not making a dent in the problem. What are our rights? What should we do? A: If your downstairs neighbor is not on the lease, then he is, like you say, probably living in the apartment illegally. But first, deal with the rodents and roaches. Shareholders and co-op boards have a landlord-tenant relationship in many respects, and it is your board's responsibility to make sure that pests do not overrun your apartment. 'If the building's regular extermination procedures don't solve the problem, the co-op is required to do more,' said William J. Geller, who practices real estate law at Braverman Greenspun. Document the problem and write a letter to the co-op board. If it does not respond, call 311 to make a complaint to Housing Preservation & Development, and encourage your neighbors to do the same. If the co-op does not take reasonable steps to stop the infestation, you could have claims against it for breaches of your proprietary lease, the warranty of habitability and fiduciary duty, Mr. Geller said. As far as evicting your neighbor, that could take a long time. Check the proprietary lease to see if it outlines the succession rights for shareholders' family members. They are typically pretty strict. 'Most proprietary leases provide that a relative who is not on the stock and lease is not allowed to live in the apartment without the shareholder being present,' said Richard Klein, a partner who practices real estate law at Dorf Nelson & Zauderer LLP. 'If the shareholder is not there, whether they are dead or alive, it is an illegal sublet.' There are two approaches to get him out: The co-op can either try to evict him with a notice to vacate and a holdover proceeding in housing court, or leave it up to the deceased shareholder's estate. In the latter case, the co-op can serve notice to the executor of the estate, stating that the grandson must leave within 30 days or the proprietary lease will be terminated. If the executor takes no action to evict him, the co-op could terminate the lease and sell the shares at an auction, which would place the responsibility of eviction onto the new owner.
