Hi Vin,
You comments as ever were very pertinent.
I have already supplied detailed comments directly to Mike as I was quite
shocked at issues relating to the guide but haven't provided a
comprehensive response (stopped after 20 comments!) as we normally provide
this sort of information for a small fee!
It appears from Mike's discussions with me that this is a guide which has
not been written or developed by Mike, but the company wanted feedback on
their original guide.
It is a bit unfortunate that this wasn't clear when he posted the
information.
Any guide should reflect good practice in relation to access audit
procedures, follow clear print guidelines especially sans serif font, not
words in capital letters etc and follow the social model including the use
of language, and as you also state, reflect the requirements of people
with a wide range of impairments and multiple impairments.
It also seemed to me that there was a serious need for the company to
consider their policies and procedures and there was a serious confusion
about health and safety issues and the decision making process by staff,
which was not very transparent and the lack of information could lead to
disabled people paying a lot of money for rides and facilities they could
not access or being turned away. Also as you note, there seems to be a
large number of inaccessible areas.
Apparently Mike has received a number of comments and hopefully this will
lead to a more reliable and transparent guide and commitment from the
management. It seems to have exposed some difficulties for Blackpool
Pleasure Beach in relation to the Equality Act but it is difficult to
provide further suggestions without knowing more about the nature of the
brief.
Best wishes
Flick
> Hi Mike,
>
> I was not going to spend time on this but when I saw positive comments and
> then skimmed through to see some detail it was something I felt needed a
> response.
> There has obviously been a great deal of work put in to detail both the
> accessibility of features and the physical abilities needed to access the
> rides but the use of symbols is worrying because the standard wheelchair
> symbol has been used throughout completely inappropriately: it is
> understood universally to indicate accessible facilities but it is used
> here only to indicate access to facilities in the case of the rides.
>
> The guide users language that the author obviously thinks is courteous and
> polite but is now unacceptable such as “guests with disabilities”,
> “special needs”, “disabled access”, “disabled toilets" and there is a need
> for this sort of document to be written in consistently plain language, so
> phrases like:
> "Patrons must exhibit the following attributes” do not fit this
> model. Also terms like ‘manoeuvre’ and ‘negotiate’ are used, presumably to
> imply that people will need to step sideways or over or around obstacles
> but this language needs to be more specific for people to judge if they
> can really manage what might be involved in advance.
>
> Although the guide has gone into considerable detail to ensure that people
> are not excluded from rides as a blanket policy, and that is greatly
> appreciated, there are some key details missing such as the heights of
> steps and maximum distance customers would have to walk for evacuation:
> the sort of detail people will need in advance.
>
> There is confusion about how the Blue Badge Scheme is supposed to be
> operated. While on private property strictly speaking site owners can do
> what they like, if they are using the Badge to determine eligibility to
> accessible parking they should not then be allowing people who do not hold
> Blue Badges to use the designated spaces. There is also confusion between
> Blue Badges and other photo ID. They need to understand that they have no
> authority to examine the photo ID on a Blue Badge but also that many
> people will not have any other sort of photo ID.
> The passage on access to the site for power chair users is confusing and
> needs clarifying as it seems to imply that only the entrance from the main
> car park [which does not seem to be indicated on the map anyway] is
> accessible for power chair users.
> Similarly, information about wheelchair access to some of the theatre
> venues seems conflicting: it cites a number of wheelchair spaces but also
> that customers have to use stairs to access seating, which implies that
> wheelchair users would be separated from family members, PAs etc. This
> would not meet the requirements of the Equality Act.
>
> There doesn’t seem to be any information about where seating can be found
> for people to rest - there may be plenty but people will feel more
> confident if they know in advance.
> Similarly, there is no mention of toilets in the index - on a large site
> like this people will need this information in advance. The map on the
> website is very well laid out and the key to facilities very helpful but
> even with the magnifying feature the details remain very small - pretty
> much useless for all except those with 20-20 vision. The phone app that is
> offered on this page is a dead link.
> There is some confusion about accessible toilets: at points in the text
> customers are instructed to ask staff for access to toilets, which I infer
> to mean that the toilet is not actually accessible - this needs clarifying
> because for someone with mobility problems combined with continence
> problems there may not be sufficient time to find staff. There is also the
> dignity issue that people should not have to ask to go to the loo! I have
> attached my briefing sheet for accessible toilet layout as from experience
> I would doubt they know what one should look like.
>
> Since this arrived as a pdf it is not clear what size it is when printed -
> the organisation need to be aware of minimum text sizes for standard text
> and the need to make alternative formats readily available. They also need
> to be aware that the guide must be available on the website in Word.doc
> format so that people using screen-reading software can access it - and
> this is where the problem with obliques in the text comes in.
>
> I have converted the guide to Word and commented using Track Changes
> Regards,
>
>
>
> Vin
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Vin West
> Chair
> Arfon Access Group
> 01286880761
> 07771536760
> Glyn Dwr
> Llandwrog Uchaf
> Caernarfon
> LL54 7RA
> [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>
>
>
>
>> On 14 Mar 2015, at 10:15, Mike Elkerton
>> <[log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>>
>> Dear Colleagues
>>
>> You may be aware that my Company (Access&evac-U-8) are involved with
>> Blackpool Pleasure Beach.
>>
>> As part of this we are reviewing their 'Access Guide' I would be
>> grateful if you could have a look at it (attached) and send any comments
>> you may have to me, before it is launched.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Mike
>>
>> Mike Elkerton NRAC (Auditor)
>> Member of the National Register of Access Consultants
>> Chair of the NW Regional Access Association
>> ----------End of Message---------- Run by SURFACE for more information
>> on research, teaching and consultancy: http://www.surface.salford.ac.uk
>> <http://www.surface.salford.ac.uk/> Archives for the Accessibuilt
>> discussion list are located at
>> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/accessibuilt.html
>> <http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/accessibuilt.html><Access Guide BPB
>> 2015 (1).pdf>
>
>
>
> ----------End of Message----------
> Run by SURFACE for more information on research, teaching and consultancy:
> http://www.surface.salford.ac.uk
> Archives for the Accessibuilt discussion list are located at
> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/accessibuilt.html
>
----------End of Message----------
Run by SURFACE for more information on research, teaching and consultancy:
http://www.surface.salford.ac.uk
Archives for the Accessibuilt discussion list are located at http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/accessibuilt.html
|
