SCHEMATIC DESIGN PLAN REVIEW REPORT for Compliance with

Batas Pambansa Bilang 344 (Accessibility Law) for the

June 2015 Schematic Plans of the Proposed UP CARIM Building MAGUINDANAO AVENUE, UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES MINDANAO, MINTAL, TUGBOK DISTRICT, DAVAO CITY Prepared by:

ARMAND MICHAEL R. EUSTAQUIO, UAP Architect, Accessibility Consultant

June 2015 Schematic Design Plan Review Report of the Proposed UP CARIM Building

TABLE OF CONTENTS Section I.

Introduction

Page 2

II. Findings and Recommendations A. Site Development Plan 1. Findings

2

2. Recommendations

2

B. Proposed Floor Plan 1. Main Entrance Ramp

5

2. Ramp to Landscaped Area

7

3. Toilet for Persons with Disabilities

8

4. Toilet at Director’s Office

10

III. References

Prepared by: Armand Michael R. Eustaquio, Architect, Accessibility Consultant

10

Page 1 of 10

June 2015 Schematic Design Plan Review Report of the Proposed UP CARIM Building

I.

INTRODUCTION In January 1983, the United Nations declared 1983 to 1992 the International Decade of Disabled Persons. Less than two months after this declaration, Batas Pambansa Bilang 344 (BP344), otherwise known as An Act to Enhance the Mobility of Disabled Persons [Persons with Disabilities] by Requiring Certain Buildings, Institutions, Establishments, and Public Utilities to Install Facilities and Other Devices, or the accessibility Law was passed into law on February 25, 1983. The Implementing Rules and Regulations of BP 344 were amended in 1994 and is the current version in use and being implemented by all Local Government Units, the DPWH, the DOTC, and all other concerned government agencies. The contents of this Plan Review Report for Compliance with Batas Pambansa Bilang 344 (BP344) or the Accessibility Law were based primarily on the current version of BP344 or the Accessibility Law and the Draft Amendments to the Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) of BP344. Reference to the Draft Amendments of BP344 were made to cover provisions not yet incorporated in the current version of BP344 like walk-in or accessible showers, areas of refuge and enhancements to grab bar configurations that need updating or in the current version of BP344. Recommendations that are based on the Draft BP 344 IRR Amendments are noted in this Plan Review Report.

II. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS A. SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN 1. Findings 1.1 There is no dropped sidewalk or curb ramp provided at the start of the driveway going up to the Porte Cochere. 2. Recommendations 2.1 Provide an accessible ramp with details as shown in Fig.A.1.1 and Fig.A.1.2.

Fig.A.1.1

Image above shows proposed location of an accessible ramp with dropped sidewalk to provide access for persons with disabilities from the Maguindanao Ave.

Prepared by: Armand Michael R. Eustaquio, Architect, Accessibility Consultant

Page 2 of 10

June 2015 Schematic Design Plan Review Report of the Proposed UP CARIM Building

Fig.A.1.2

Image above shows details of the proposed accessible ramp and dropped sidewalk. 2.2 Provide a dropped sidewalk as shown in Fig.A.1.1 and Fig.A.1.2. Fig.A.1.3 shows a 3D image of a dropped curb. Provide an opening in the continuous curb that coincides with the start of the first flight of the long ramp. 2.3 Provide continuous curbs with a minimum height of 100MM as shown in Fig.A.1.4 and Fig.A.1.6 in the long L-type ramp. 2.4 Use “J-Type” handrail supports as shown in Fig.A.1.4, Fig.A.1.5 to allow people to have a continuous grip on the handrail with no breaks imposed by the verticals in ordinary handrails. 2.5 Provide pole-mounted signage using the international symbol of access so that persons with disabilities can easily locate the accessible ramp.

Prepared by: Armand Michael R. Eustaquio, Architect, Accessibility Consultant

Page 3 of 10

June 2015 Schematic Design Plan Review Report of the Proposed UP CARIM Building

Fig. A.1.3 Image above shows typical details of a dropped sidewalk. (“Fig. B.1.1 Perspective of Dropped Sidewalk” in the Draft BP 344 IRR Amendments, page 15)

Fig. A.1.4

Image above shows a typical cross section of an accessible ramp showing handrails with “J-Type” handrail supports and continuous curbs. (“Fig.A.1.5 CURB HEIGHT AT RAMP” in the Draft BP 344 IRR Amendments, page 4)

Prepared by: Armand Michael R. Eustaquio, Architect, Accessibility Consultant

Page 4 of 10

June 2015 Schematic Design Plan Review Report of the Proposed UP CARIM Building

Fig. A.1.5 Image at left shows handrails of an accessible ramp using “J-Type” handrail supports. (“Fig.A.3.2” in the Draft BP 344 IRR Amendments, page 5)

Fig. A.1.6

Image above shows details of an accessible ramp (“Fig. A.1.4 RAMP DIMENSIONS” in the Draft BP 344 IRR Amendments, page 2)

B. PROPOSED FLOOR PLAN 1. Main Entrance Ramp 1.1 Findings a. The total effective run of the ramp is 7.45 meters. There is a difference in elevation of 900MM from the Porte Cochere (150MM from the driveway of the Porte Cochere to the sidewalk; 750MM from the sidewalk to the finish ground floor.) The total ramp run is less than the 9.0 meters needed to give the ramp a slope of 1:12. The current slope of the ramp is almost 1:10. b. The level surface at the start of the ramp is less than the minimum required 1.80 meters.

Prepared by: Armand Michael R. Eustaquio, Architect, Accessibility Consultant

Page 5 of 10

June 2015 Schematic Design Plan Review Report of the Proposed UP CARIM Building

c.

The flares on both sides of the curb ramp do not have a slope of 1:12.

1.2 Recommendations a. Modify the ramp to have a total ramp run of 9.0 meters and to have a slope of 1:12 as shown in Fig.B.1.1. b. Increase the length of the level area before the start of the ramp to 1.80 meters as shown in Fig.B.1.1 and Fig.A.1.6. c.

Fig.B.1.1

Provide a dropped sidewalk (instead of a curb ramp) as shown in Fig.B.1.1, Fig.B.1.2, and Fig.A.1.3 with a 1.80 meter opening in the continuous curb to coincide with the short ramp that goes up to the main ramp.

Image above shows proposed enhancements to the accessible ramp at the main entrance.

Prepared by: Armand Michael R. Eustaquio, Architect, Accessibility Consultant

Page 6 of 10

June 2015 Schematic Design Plan Review Report of the Proposed UP CARIM Building

Fig.B.1.2

Image above shows an enlarged view of the dropped sidewalk, approach, and start of the main entrance ramp.

2. Ramp to Landscaped Area 2.1 Findings a. One span of the ramp has a run of 7.80 meters. This is longer than the maximum of 6.0 meters allowed in BP344. 2.2 Recommendations a. Provide a 1.50 meter landing for every 6.0 meter span or ramp. If the difference in elevation between the corridor / veranda and the finish grade of the Landscaped Area is 750MM the total length of the accessible ramp should not be less than 9.0 meters as shown in Fig.A.2.1.. b. Provide a walkway/circulation route 1.20 meters wide (minimum) with a firm flat surface in the Landscaped Area that can support the weight of a person who uses a wheelchair (without sinking), with no depressions or protrusions greater than 6mm in the Landscaping (landscaped area) that can be comfortably used by persons with disabilities especially those who use wheelchairs.

Prepared by: Armand Michael R. Eustaquio, Architect, Accessibility Consultant

Page 7 of 10

June 2015 Schematic Design Plan Review Report of the Proposed UP CARIM Building

Fig.B.2.1

Image above shows details of proposed accessible ramp to Landscaped Area.

3. Toilet for Persons with Disabilities 3.1 Findings a. There are no grab bars shown for the water closet. 3.2 Recommendations a. Provide grab bars for users of the watercloset as shown in Fig.B.3.1, Fig.B.3.2, and Fig.B.3.3. b. Position the watercloset 450mm away from the adjacent wall measured from the centerline of the watercloset to the face of the adjacent wall. a. use the private toilet at the director’s office and would have to go out of the office to use the common accessible toilet.

Prepared by: Armand Michael R. Eustaquio, Architect, Accessibility Consultant

Page 8 of 10

June 2015 Schematic Design Plan Review Report of the Proposed UP CARIM Building

Fig. B.3.1

Image above shows 3D view of an Accessible Toilet (“Fig. C.6.2 3D VIEW OF ACCESSIBLE TOILET FOR PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES” in the Draft BP 344 IRR Amendments, page 33)

Fig. B.3.2 Image above shows detailed of dimensions of an Accessible Watercloset (“Fig C.6.3 BLOW UP FLOOR PLAN OF ACCESSIBLE TOILET FOR PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES” in the Draft BP 344 IRR Amendments, page 34)

Prepared by: Armand Michael R. Eustaquio, Architect, Accessibility Consultant

Page 9 of 10

June 2015 Schematic Design Plan Review Report of the Proposed UP CARIM Building

Fig. B.3.3 Image above shows 3D view of an “L-type Grab bar (“Fig. C.6.4 L-TYPE GRAB BAR” in the Draft BP 344 IRR Amendments, page 34)

4. Toilet at Director’s Office 4.1 Findings a. The toilet is not accessible. 4.2 Recommendations a. BP344 does not require individual toilets for private offices to be made accessible if there is an accessible toilet that is close by. It would however be very awkward when the time comes that the UP CARIM Building will have a Director with disabilities and would not to be able to use the toilet in his/her office. b. Follow the same recommendations for the toilet for persons with disabilities if UP Mindanao decides to make the toilet of the Director accessible for future Directors who may have disabilities.

IV. REFERENCES 1. National Council for the Welfare of Disabled Persons (NCWDP) Batas Pambansa Bilang 344 (Accessibility Law) and it’s Implementing Rules and Regulations, NCWDP, 1995. 2. Draft Amendments to Batas Pambansa Bilang 344 July 10, 2013

Prepared by: Armand Michael R. Eustaquio, Architect, Accessibility Consultant

Page 10 of 10