Meh. My idea: Trebuchet.
1 Like
Usually what we get is both. A sum of money is appropriated to help those in need, After the money works its way through the layer of the entrenched civil service and the layer of politically influential contractors, a much reduced sum is extruded at the other end for the ostensible recipients.
It would not surprise me at all to find that some of the 40K spent on this ramp found its way to the retirement fund of one or more local officials. And an elevator would have followed the same route.
This enables us to theorize as to why a simple swap of flats did not take place. Insufficient opportunity for graft.
I will start out by saying that I donât know how public assistance works in the UK. Yes, I am an engineer.
The most practical solution would seem to be to start with a house closer to ground level. But could they be legally required -or even requested- to move? This quote suggests not.
West Dunbartonshire council said the family had said they could manage the steps at the property. "This proved not to be the case. As they were existing tenants, it was the councilâs duty to make the necessary adaptations.
So if the council is legally obliged to adapt the existing residence, and the height above ground is so much, and the maximum incline allowed for wheelchair ramps is so much, mathematics tells you how many linear feet of ramp you need. Then itâs a matter of packing it all into a yard of a given area.
If the solution suggested by the above looks ungainly, does the council have the option to bend the law and find something more pleasing? Is a pleasant appearance required by law? Is it reasonable to expect aesthetic judgment from a council of elected officials?
Did Ms. Lally offer to move? Suggest it as a solution? No information. She admits the ramp is functional but objects to its appearance and wishes the council had found âsome otherâ solution, though she does not suggest any ideas herself.
Then she wants a gate to keep the other kids out, and is asking the council for that. A gate canât cost that much- does the law forbid her putting in one herself? I see three adults in this picture- Ms. Lally, her âpartnerâ, and the girlsâ father- are any of them employed? Can they afford a simple gate?
3 Likes
Gnome flingers http://www.angelfire.com/la/Lorantha/Gnomes.html#Mount Nevermind
1 Like
Looking at the yard pre-ramp, if they have to meet a maximum 1:12 slope (recommended maximum for an unassisted hand-driven wheelchair) the way they did itâs the only way to do it going across the yard and back. They need 60-72â of inclined ramp, and my guess is the yardâs no more than 12-15â wide. Allowing 3â of flat space at each end for turning around, thatâs at least 7-8 folds to the ramp. But why do it across the lot? It looks like a good 20-24â front-to-back, so running the ramp perpendicular to the street you could get away with just 3 folds to it. Youâd still eat about half the yard to ramp if you wanted to keep the steps, but thatâs better than eating up the entire yard.
They donât own the home â are they legally allowed to make modifications?
OK, so I know that this ramp is in the UK and Iâm using US standards. But here we go.
The slope must be 1:12. That is, for every inch of rise, there must be a foot of run.
The maximum rise allowed in any single leg of the ramp is 30 inches, which corresponds to a ramp run of 30 feet. Given the size of the house, this constraint doesnât matter.
The minimum radius for switchback points is 36 inches.
Assuming a 36" wide front door, the house is about 20 feet wide.
And assuming a 7" stair rise, I counted 12 stairs to the door. So a 7 foot rise requires an 84 foot run.
If we can use the full 20â of the house width, then we need to subtract 6â for landings/turnarounds at the sides. 84 feet of ramp run divided by 14 feet of space yields at least six ramp segments.
It looks at least 30 feet, maybe more, from the front of the house to the sidewalk. I donât know the rock situation under the yard, but my guess is that the engineers were thinking that to maximize safety, they would keep the ramp as close to the ground as possible, in case anyone fell from it.
Looking at the totality of the requirements and constraints, as well as some good safety planning, they reduced the slope of the ramp (which would be good for a child powering her own wheelchair), used fairly short segments with more frequent landings, and kept it close to the ground. When you add up the widths of the segments, it takes up the whole yard.
And thereâs your story.
9 Likes
Thank you, you saved me some time there, agree totally. They are constrained in what they can do, being an official body, and I expect they did the best they could and it would appear at quite significant cost. Damned if they do and damned if they donât in my book.
And of course, establish another new and interesting way for corruption to work.
Be careful of what you wish for, lest it arrives on your doorstepâŚ
No, heâs a troll.
It wouldâve been so awesome if they had put a loopty loop in there too just for spite.
In America, you have the right to demand that your home be accessible, be it in public housing or just a private rental. But hereâs the catch - YOU have to pay for the âimprovementsâ yourself.
My fave is the Social Security Disability hearings office in Atlanta. Itâs downtown, where parking is very limited. The nearest parking is halfway down a steep hill. Thereâs a sidewalk, so if you have a motorized ride, you can do it. But they donât warn anyone beforehand. So, if you are on crutches or using a cane, or have heart r breathing issues, good luck to you! Probably, the only other solution would be to call a cab and get a ride up that 1 steep block.
Better yet, since itâs the hearing office, the only reason you would be there is to have a hearing as to your âofficialâ disability status. So, they give you no room to complain prior to a decision, and also donât give you a decision on the spot so that you are assured of your status under the Disabilities Act. IOW - Social Security says, âScrew you! if you canât come here because you are too disabled, then we will not make a finding of disability, either!â
God bless Murika! And apparently, Britain, too.
1 Like
OMG. You absolutely rule!
That was justâŚpoetic.
Iâm sorry, but I donât have much sympathy. The housing is either free or heavily subsidized. The ramp was free. When you are reliant on the support of others, you do not have a lot of say in how they manage those affairs on your behalf.
Public agencies, departments, districts, councils, whatever, are not going to put in a solution that requires active mechanisms or electrical power when they can avoid it. Mechanisms can break, electrical power can be interrupted; both will leave the operator or dependent person stuck. An unpowered, static solution will always win out if itâs feasible. In this case, to the decision makers, aesthetics do not matter and are not a consideration, following the law and avoiding mechanical problems are paramount.
When school districts put in portable classroom buildings they usually use a metal ramp on one classroom door, and metal stairs on the other. Wheelchair-bound kids assigned to the classroom with the stairs have to go through the connecting door to use the metal ramp for the adjacent classroom, this is both legal and completely normal. The only places where small lifts to change moderate elevations are common in schools are to get from audience level to stage level in auditoriums, simply because there is no room for a ramp.
When she is able to support herself and her family then she can complain all that she wants. Otherwise she should remember that she is living on the kindness of the society that pays to support her. After all, whining about it will only serve to make people reconsider how much they want to pay to support those in need as opposed to letting them fend for themselves.
I donât buy the âShould have got a liftâ argument. Who services the lift? They require maintenance. What about repairs? Who supplies the electricity? Could you imagine the hoo-haa if a lift got installed and the houseowners said âWe canât afford to maintain this! Why did they give us this?â
At the end of the day, when dealing with electrical and mechanical things:
If it moves, itâll soon stop moving.
If itâs not meant to move, itâll start moving.
If itâs meant to conduct, it soon wonât.
If itâs not meant to conduct, well god help you, cause you just got an electric shock.
I think the point is that they assigned her THIS public housing space, despite the fact that she needs access for a child who is disabled. They could have moved her, or just not assigned an idiotic house in the first place.
Confirmed: To add insult to injury they could have easily purchased an entirely different property in the same area for that 40k. http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/West-Dunbartonshire.html?sortType=1
This is douchiness of the highest order.
4 Likes
Well, according to the article, the tenants originally said they would be able to handle the access needs. So thatâs not really all on one party.
The article doesnât say anything about the possibility of moving, unfortunately. That would seem to be the most straightforward solution, as long as there was somewhere to move them to⌠so itâs a shame that nothing is said about whether it was considered by either side, or if there were circumstances preventing it.
They very well may have said that either in good faith to later be proved wrong, or just because the alternative was no house at all. Social housing in this country has been deliberately and extensively degraded for thirty years and more now.
2 Likes
Donât know where you live but here in Germany everyone has the RIGHT to a life in decent humane conditions. I gladly pay with my taxes for those unlucky or unfortunate ones who canât support themselves. I donât think itâs kindness to support those in need but just plain common sense to help them back on their feet.
7 Likes
