FLORIDA BUILDING COMMISSION
FLORIDA ACCESSIBILITY CODE WORKGROUP
October
11, 2010—Meeting IX
Hilton University of Florida
1714 S.W. 34th Street—Gainesville, Florida 32607—1.352.371.3600
Meeting Objectives
ü To Approve Regular Procedural Topics
(Agenda and Summary Report)
ü To Review Phase III Project Scope
ü To Review Draft of the Integration of
Florida Specific Requirements with the New DOJ Standards for Accessible Design
(SAD) Relative to Final Published DOJ Rules (9/15/10)
ü To Consider Public Comment
ü To Identify Needed Next Steps and Agenda
Items for Next Meeting
All
Agenda Times—Including Public Comment and Adjournment—Are Subject to Change
Meeting Agenda—Monday, October
11, 2010
2:00* Welcome
and Opening
Agenda Review and Approval
Approval of June 7, 2010
Facilitator’s Summary Report
xxxxxxApplication Fees for FACBC Waivers
Phase
III Project Scope Overview
Review
and Discuss Changes to the Document Integrating Accessibility Standards of
Florida Law with the New DOJ Standards
for Accessible Design Based on the Final DOJ Rules 28 CFR 35 and 28 CFR 36 as Published in the September 12, 2010
Federal Register
Review
and Discuss Other Staff Cleanup Changes
General Public Comment
Review of Workgroup Delivery
and Meeting Schedule
Next Steps: Agenda
Items, Needed Information, Assignments, Date and Location
xxxxxx- Staff Corrections to Work Group FACBC Draft v.11
xxxxxx- Cleaned FACBC Draft v.11 with Staff Corrections
Adjourn
Contact Information and Project Webpage
Jeff Blair: jblair@fsu.edu ; http://consensus.fsu.edu/FBC/accessibility-code.html
*Meeting will start at 2:00 PM or upon
completion of Accessibility Code and Law Workshop.
Florida Accessibility Code Workgroup
Scott Cannard, Bemmie
Eustace, Kiko Franco, Skip Gregory, Jeff Gross, Jon Hamrick, Jack Humburg,
Diana Ibarra, Julia Kates, J.W. Longman, Chris Masal, Sharon Mignardi, John
O'Connor, Barbara Page, Catherine Powell, Ben Ritter, Larry Schneider, Jim
Schock, Shelly Siegal, Julie Shaw, Randy Vann, and Phillip Wisely.
Meeting Schedule for 2009 and 2010:
2009: February 2, April 6, August 10, October 12, and December 7.
2010: February 1, April 6, June 7, and October 11.
OVERVIEW
AND PROJECT SCOPE
The scope of the Workgroup is to develop
recommendations for updating the Florida Accessibility Code for Building
Construction once the US Department of Justice completes its adoption of the
next generation of the ADA Standards for Accessibility Design (SAD). The
task is to integrate the relevant Florida standards in ss. 553.501-553.513,
F.S., into the 2004 ADAAG as adopted by 28 CFR 36 (prospective). Although DOJ's
process was not complete, the Workgroup began with the 2004 ADAAG and DOJ's additions
currently adopted in 28 CFR 36 and further additions proposed in its June 8,
2008 Notice of Proposed Rule (NOPR).
The process for developing the new Florida Accessibility
Code for Building Construction is comprised
of three phases.
Phase I of the project focused on
the integration of Florida
Specific Requirements into the Proposed DOJ SAD, June 2008, and was divided into major tasks as follows:
Task 1:
Integration of Florida standards established in
s.553.501-s.553.513, F.S. into sections of the 2004 ADAAG that have a one for
one parallel section in the 1994 SAD.
Task 2:
Deciding what to do with Florida standards that
are in sections/subsections of 1994 SAD that do not have a one for one parallel
section in the 2004 ADAAG.
Task 3:
Integration of Florida standards into new
sections in the 2004 ADAAG that have no parallel in the Florida Accessibility
Code (e.g., recreational facilities).
Task 4:
Revising the draft Florida Accessibility Code
based on the 2004 ADAAG for changes made by DOJ in its rule making.
Phase
I initiated with the
February 2009 meeting and concluded with the April 2010 meeting.
Phase
II of the project
commenced at the June 7, 2010 meeting (Meeting VIII) and focuses on
identification of the 2004 ADAAG section
numbers for updating references in s.553.504, Florida
Statutes, currently based on the 1991
SAD. The target date for Phase II is to develop recommendations
for the 2011 Legislature.
Phase
III will commence
October 2010 with a public workshop. In Phase III the Workgroup will
review all of the current Florida
Specific Requirements and recommend whether there should be any
revisions or clarifications. The target
date for Phase III will be to develop recommendations for the 2011 Legislature.
Workgroup Adopted Project Strategy Consistent with Project Scope
At Meeting I (February 2, 2009) the Workgroup was asked as a threshold question whether to proceed
with consideration regarding integrating the Florida Specific requirements into
the DOJ SAD, June 2008 or delay pending completion of rulemaking. Following are
the actions taken by the Workgroup:
Workgroup Actions:
Motion—The Workgroup voted unanimously, 18 - 0
in favor, to integrate all current Florida Specific requirements into the
Proposed DOJ SAD (Standards for Accessible Design), June 2008, and concurrently
identify issues that should be discussed for possible recommendations regarding
Florida Specific requirements and ancillary topics, to be forwarded to the
Legislature.
Motion—The Workgroup voted unanimously, 18 - 0
in favor, to move forward with developing the
new Florida
Accessibility Code without delay.
Project Documents
DOJ SAD, June
2008, “Proposed ADA Standards for Accessible Design”.
(2004 ADAAG and
definitions and scoping criteria adopted directly in 28 CFR 36.)
FACBC 2009,
“Florida Accessibility Code for Building Construction”.
Sections
553.501-553.513, Florida Statutes.
ACCESSIBILITY CODE WORKGROUP PROCEDURAL GUIDELINES
PARTICIPANTS’ ROLE
ü The Workgroup process is an opportunity
to explore possibilities. Offering or exploring an idea does not necessarily
imply support for it.
ü Listen to understand. Seek a shared
understanding even if you don’t agree.
ü Be focused and concise—balance
participation & minimize repetition. Share the airtime.
ü Look to the facilitator(s) to be
recognized. Please raise your hand to speak.
ü Speak one person at a time. Please don’t
interrupt each other.
ü Focus on issues, not personalities.
Avoid stereotyping or personal attacks.
ü To the extent possible, offer options to
address other’s concerns, as well as your own.
ü Participate fully in discussions, and
complete meeting assignments as requested.
ü Serve as an accessible liaison, and
represent and communicate with member’s constituent group(s).
FACILITATORS’ ROLE (FCRC Consensus
Center @ FSU)
ü Design and facilitate a participatory
workgroup process.
ü Assist the Workgroup to build consensus
on a package of recommendations for delivery to the Florida Building
Commission.
ü Provide process design and procedural
recommendations to staff and the Workgroup.
ü Assist participants to stay focused and
on task.
ü Assure that participants follow ground
rules.
ü Prepare and post agenda packets,
worksheets and meeting summary reports.
GUIDELINES FOR BRAINSTORMING
ü Speak when recognized by the
Facilitator(s).
ü Offer one idea per person without
explanation.
ü No comments, criticism, or discussion of
other's ideas.
ü Listen respectively to other's ideas and
opinions.
ü Seek understanding and not agreement at
this point in the discussion.
THE NAME STACKING PROCESS
ü Determines the speaking order.
ü Participant raises hand to speak.
Facilitator(s) will call on participants in turn.
ü Facilitator(s) may interrupt the stack
(change the speaking order) in order to promote discussion on a specific issue
or, to balance participation and allow those who have not spoken on an issue an
opportunity to do so before others on the list who have already spoken on the
issue.
ACCEPTABILITY RANKING SCALE
During the
meetings, members will be asked to develop and rank options, and following
discussions
and refinements, may be asked to do additional rankings of the options if
requested by members and staff. Please be prepared to offer specific
refinements or changes to address your reservations. The following scale will
be utilized for the ranking exercises:
WORKGROUP’S
CONSENSUS PROCESS
The Workgroup
will seek to develop a package of consensus-based recommendations for submittal
to the Florida Building Commission.
General consensus is a participatory process whereby, on matters of
substance, the members strive for agreements which all of the members can
accept, support, live with or agree not to oppose. In
instances where, after vigorously exploring possible ways to enhance the
members’ support for the final decision on a recommendation, and the Workgroup
finds that 100% acceptance or support is not achievable, final decisions will
require at least 75% favorable vote of all members present and voting. This super majority decision rule underscores
the importance of actively developing consensus throughout the process on
substantive issues with the participation of all members and which all can live
with. In instances where the Workgroup
finds that even 75% acceptance or support is not achievable, publication of
recommendations will include documentation of the differences and the options that
were considered for which there is more than 50% support from the Workgroup.
The Workgroup
will develop its recommendations using consensus-building techniques with the
assistance of the facilitator.
Techniques such as brainstorming, ranking and prioritizing approaches
will be utilized. Where differences
exist that prevent the Workgroup from reaching a final consensus decision (i.e.
with support of at least 75% of the members) on a recommendation, the Workgroup
will outline the differences in its documentation.
The Workgroup’s
consensus process will be conducted as an open process consistent with
applicable law. Workgroup members,
staff, and facilitator will be the only participants seated at the table. Only
Workgroup members may participate in discussions and vote on proposals and
recommendations. The facilitator, or a Workgroup member through the
facilitator, may request specific clarification from a member of the public in
order to assist the Workgroup in understanding an issue. Observers/members of the public are welcome to speak during the
public comment period provided at each meeting, and all comments submitted on
the public comment forms provided in the agenda packets will be included in the
facilitator’ summary reports.
Facilitator
will work with staff and Workgroup members to design agendas and worksheets
that will be both efficient and effective.
The staff will help the Workgroup with information and meeting
logistics.
To enhance the
possibility of constructive discussions as members educate themselves on the
issues and engage in consensus-building, members agree to refrain from public
statements that may prejudge the outcome of the Workgroup’s consensus
process. In discussing the Workgroup
process with the media, members agree to be careful to present only their own
views and not the views or statements of other participants. In addition, in
order to provide balance to the Workgroup process, members agree to represent
and consult with their stakeholder interest groups.