News Space Mountain exit being worked on

[Rteetz]

So how does it help ADA compliance by removing it?

Widening the ramp area so it is more accessible for wheelchairs and such.

 

[HauntedPirate]

So, if it's ADA compliance, why now and not in 2008/9? Genuinely interested, not being snarky.

 

[Jybbers]

I think there are several reasons for the change to my understanding and not just one specifically. Apparently where you come out in the gift shop will be different too, which might help with the traffic by the doors. Interesting enough, work hasn't even started on this project.

 

[Corgi]

Well the drywall they put up in the gift shop sure looks like it might as well be permanent. Whatever construction they have going on, they knew it was going to take awhile.

 

[ChrisFL]

I like speedramps. They always made me think of Disney. At least the Mansion one is still around, isn't it?

yes and so are the Peoplemover ones

 

[monothingie]

So, if it's ADA compliance, why now and not in 2008/9? Genuinely interested, not being snarky.

SM was built in 1975, 16 years before the implementation of the ADA act of 1990. If it was determined that the walkway was end of life and needed to be replaced, they could not replace what was there with a like for like replacement because the current moving walkway does not meet accessibility requirements.

Hence the dilemma of does Disney spend a lot of money engineering and putting something compliant in, or just remove it and make it a standard ADA compliant non moving walkway.

It seems they chose the latter.

Ironic considering the entrance queue is in no way ADA compliant due to its stairs, walkway width, and ramp incline. But because the design remains un altered since its construction, there is no obligation to make it ADA compliant.

 

[ChrisFL]

I wonder if they waited until this time so they could make any changes related to TRON next door...maybe they'll have something else on the exit ramp or maybe even re-route for people who want to go that direction?

 

[FigmentFan82]

I thought that the revised exit was due to the beginnings of construction for the Tron coaster. Is that not the case?

 

[peter11435]

I thought that the revised exit was due to the beginnings of construction for the Tron coaster. Is that not the case?

Unrelated

 

[lazyboy97o]

Well the drywall they put up in the gift shop sure looks like it might as well be permanent. Whatever construction they have going on, they knew it was going to take awhile.

Drywall is very easy to put up and tear down.

SM was built in 1975, 16 years before the implementation of the ADA act of 1990. If it was determined that the walkway was end of life and needed to be replaced, they could not replace what was there with a like for like replacement because the current moving walkway does not meet accessibility requirements.

Hence the dilemma of does Disney spend a lot of money engineering and putting something compliant in, or just remove it and make it a standard ADA compliant non moving walkway.

It seems they chose the latter.

Ironic considering the entrance queue is in no way ADA compliant due to its stairs, walkway width, and ramp incline. But because the design remains un altered since its construction, there is no obligation to make it ADA compliant.

Replacing like for like is allowed as are alternate paths. Only providing ramps, especially large ones, is also discouraged by the 2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design.

“Advisory 405.2 Slope. To accommodate the widest range of users, provide ramps with the least possible running slope and, wherever possible, accompany ramps with stairs for use by those individuals for whom distance presents a greater barrier than steps, e.g., people with heart disease or limited stamina.”

 

[monothingie]

Drywall is very easy to put up and tear down.


Replacing like for like is allowed as are alternate paths. Only providing ramps, especially large ones, is also discouraged by the 2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design.

“Advisory 405.2 Slope. To accommodate the widest range of users, provide ramps with the least possible running slope and, wherever possible, accompany ramps with stairs for use by those individuals for whom distance presents a greater barrier than steps, e.g., people with heart disease or limited stamina.”

There are special conditions for public amusement/recreational applications. In this situation like for like does not apply.

https://www.access-board.gov/guidel...on-facilities/guides/guide-on-amusement-rides

 

[rreading]

Drywall is very easy to put up and tear down.


Replacing like for like is allowed as are alternate paths. Only providing ramps, especially large ones, is also discouraged by the 2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design.

“Advisory 405.2 Slope. To accommodate the widest range of users, provide ramps with the least possible running slope and, wherever possible, accompany ramps with stairs for use by those individuals for whom distance presents a greater barrier than steps, e.g., people with heart disease or limited stamina.”

Not to derail, but I wish they would do this for the exit ramp off the monorail at Epcot. Why we have to walk half a mile when stairs would serve is beyond me.

 

[marni1971]

Not to derail, but I wish they would do this for the exit ramp off the monorail at Epcot. Why we have to walk half a mile when stairs would serve is beyond me.

To evenly distribute a full monorail load of guests unloading at once and not dump them all at the same time.

Back when the entrance plaza had different priorities.

 

[Missing20K]

Drywall is very easy to put up and tear down.

Too easy some might say.

There are special conditions for public amusement/recreational applications. In this situation like for like does not apply.

https://www.access-board.gov/guidel...on-facilities/guides/guide-on-amusement-rides

They could be granted an exemption if the alterations required would not be technically feasible, yes??

Other examples where compliance could potentially be technically infeasible include:

• conflicts with applicable building, plumbing, life safety or other codes (such as when combining two toilet stalls to create an accessible stall would violate the plumbing code’s required fixture count);
• meeting slope requirements on existing developed sites located on steep terrain where necessary re-grading and other design solutions are not feasible; or
• work that would impact load-bearing walls and other essential components of the structural frame, including structural reinforcement of the floor slab.

 

[USofA scott]

There are special conditions for public amusement/recreational applications. In this situation like for like does not apply.

https://www.access-board.gov/guidel...on-facilities/guides/guide-on-amusement-rides

Actually, according to these guidelines, the like for like would apply. Replacing the speedramp would not trigger any new guidelines:
"Altered rides refer to changes in structural or operational characteristics of an existing ride vehicle configuration from those specified by the manufacturer or the original design criteria. An existing ride is also considered an altered ride if the load or unload area is newly designed or constructed. "

 

[PiratesMansion]

I'm actually in favor of this. So many people would just gawk and use the moving walkway to park themselves until they were within sight of the gift shop. What should have made exiting the ride quicker and more efficient turned it into an impenetrable wall of standing bodies.

Moving WALKway, not moving STANDway. And clearly most people stood less because they were that interested in the postshow and more because they were LAZY.

Now this won't happen (and if it does bottleneck it should be easier to get around). I am thrilled!

 

[marni1971]

Now this won't happen (and if it does bottleneck it should be easier to get around). I am thrilled!

No, it wouldn’t. A bottleneck on a speed ramp would keep moving. Removing the speed ramp would create an impenetrable blob of human in a very narrow space.

 

[monothingie]

No, it wouldn’t. A bottleneck on a speed ramp would keep moving. Removing the speed ramp would create an impenetrable blob of human in a very narrow space.

An actual picture of a WDW blob in its natural habitat while feeding.

 

[PiratesMansion]

No, it wouldn’t. A bottleneck on a speed ramp would keep moving. Removing the speed ramp would create an impenetrable blob of human in a very narrow space.

But isn't the main point of the project to widen the ramp, thus alleviating said congestion?

Thinking about it further (though I don't have great knowledge of the building), I recognize that there is only so much space between the two tracks in that spot. But for the time being, I'm choosing to be optimistic. I'm hoping, perhaps naively, that if they are going forward with the project there is enough space to allow the smooth passage of all guests, including those whose needs are covered under ADA.

I'm not convinced that the same number of people will be hanging around looking at the displays if there isn't a speedramp there to take the work out of walking for them. Especially in the current "must make it to FP/Dining reservation now and maximize every moment and dollar, no time to smell the roses" climate Disney has pushed on guests.

 

[marni1971]

But isn't the main point of the project to widen the ramp, thus alleviating said congestion?.

I’m not familiar with the project but I don’t believe that’s possible, particularly under the railroad.

There’s an old service corridor parallel to the speed ramp (more of a small backstage void) but I’m not sure it’s practical to connect with it. I may be wrong.