2. PLAN ADA Self-Evaluation and Transition Plan

December 2025
City of Yuma
Americans with Disabilities
Act (ADA) Self-Evaluation
and Transition Plan
Prepared by:
Kimley-Horn
1001 West Southern Avenue
Suite 131
Mesa, AZ 85210
In association with:
Partner Engineering and Science, Inc.

The City of Yuma has prepared this transition plan with the assistance of the consultant team led by Kimley-Horn and
Associates, Inc. The Consultant Team, the ADA/504 Coordinator, and the contributing departments of the City of Yuma
are responsible for developing the ADA Self-Evaluation and Transition Plan.

Table of Contents
Abbreviations ..................................................................................................................... iv
1.0 Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Purpose ............................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Legislative Mandate ............................................................................................................. 1
1.3 ADA Self-Evaluation and Transition Plan Development Requirements and Process .......... 1
1.4 Discrimination and Accessibility ........................................................................................... 2
1.4.1 Physical Barriers ................................................................................................................... 2
1.4.2 Programmatic Barriers .......................................................................................................... 2
1.4.3 Ongoing Accessibility Improvements .................................................................................... 2
1.4.4 City of Yuma Approach ......................................................................................................... 2
1.6 New Construction and Alterations ....................................................................................... 4
1.7 Existing City Programs that Implement ADA Upgrades ....................................................... 6
2.0 Public Outreach ....................................................................................................... 7
2.1 ADA Advisory Commission .................................................................................................. 7
2.2 Web Survey ......................................................................................................................... 7
2.3 Web Map ............................................................................................................................. 8
2.4 On-going Public Outreach ................................................................................................... 9
3.0 Self-Evaluation and Summary of Observations .................................................. 10
3.1 Services, Policies, and Practices Review .......................................................................... 10
3.1.1 ADA/504 Coordinator .......................................................................................................... 11
3.1.2 Roles and Responsibilities of the ADA/504 Coordinator ..................................................... 11
3.1.3 ADA Grievance Policy, Procedure, and Form with Appeal Process for the ADA ................ 12
3.1.4 Public Notice Under the ADA .............................................................................................. 13
3.2 Program, Services, and Activities Inventory ...................................................................... 13
3.3 Facilities Review ................................................................................................................ 14
3.3.1 Buildings.............................................................................................................................. 14
3.3.2 Recreation Facilities ............................................................................................................ 15
3.3.3 Parks ................................................................................................................................... 16
3.3.4 Signalized Intersections ...................................................................................................... 18
3.3.5 Sidewalk Corridors .............................................................................................................. 20
3.3.6 On-Street Accessible Parking ............................................................................................. 23
3.3.7 Pedestrian At-grade Railroad Crossings ............................................................................. 26
3.4 Maintenance Versus Alterations ........................................................................................ 27
4.0 Facility Conceptual Budget Estimates ................................................................. 29
4.1 Facility Conceptual Budget Estimate Overview ................................................................. 29
4.2 Implementation Schedule .................................................................................................. 30
4.3 Funding Opportunities ....................................................................................................... 30
4.3.1 Federal and State Funding .................................................................................................. 30
4.3.2 Local Funding ...................................................................................................................... 30
i

5.0 Transition Plan ....................................................................................................... 31
5.1 Transition Plan Requirements ........................................................................................... 31
5.4 Implementation Strategy .................................................................................................... 32
6.0 Conclusion and Next Steps .................................................................................. 34
Appendix ........................................................................................................................... 36
Appendix A: Public Outreach ...................................................................................................... 37
Summary of Public Access Survey Responses ............................................................................... 37
Web Map Summary ......................................................................................................................... 46
Appendix B: Facility Inventory Map ............................................................................................. 48
Appendix C: Evaluated Facility Maps .......................................................................................... 49
List of Tables
Table 1. Summary of Applicable Standards ................................................................................................... 4
Table 2. Summary of Buildings Reviewed in 2024....................................................................................... 14
Table 3. Summary of Buildings to be Reviewed in Future Phase ................................................................ 15
Table 4. Summary of Recreational Facilities Reviewed in 2024 .................................................................. 16
Table 5. Summary of Recreational Facilities Reviewed in Future Phase ..................................................... 16
Table 6. Summary of Parks Reviewed in 2024 ............................................................................................ 17
Table 7. Summary of Parks to be Reviewed in Future Phase...................................................................... 17
Table 8. Summary of Curb Ramp Observations at Signalized Intersections ............................................... 19
Table 9. Summary of Push Button Observations ......................................................................................... 20
Table 10. Summary of Curb Ramp Observations at Unsignalized Intersections .......................................... 22
Table 11. Summary of Required On-Street Accessible Parking Totals ........................................................ 24
Table 12. Summary of Accessible Parking Compliance .............................................................................. 25
Table 13. Summary of Access Aisle Compliance ........................................................................................ 26
Table 14. Summary of Observations at Railroad Crossings ........................................................................ 26
Table 15. Summary of Conceptual Budget Estimates ................................................................................. 29
Table 16. Public Access Survey Question 1 ................................................................................................ 37
Table 17. Public Access Survey Question 2 ................................................................................................ 38
Table 18. Public Access Survey Question 3 ................................................................................................ 38
Table 19. Public Access Survey Question 4 ................................................................................................ 38
Table 20. Public Access Survey Question 5 ................................................................................................ 39
Table 21. Public Access Survey Question 6 ................................................................................................ 40
Table 22. Public Access Survey Question 7 ................................................................................................ 40
Table 23. Public Access Survey Question 8 ................................................................................................ 41
Table 24. Public Access Survey Question 9 ................................................................................................ 41
ii

Table 25. Public Access Survey Question 10 .............................................................................................. 41
Table 26. Public Access Survey Question 11 .............................................................................................. 42
Table 27. Public Access Survey Question 12 .............................................................................................. 42
Table 28. Public Access Survey Question 13 .............................................................................................. 42
Table 29. Public Access Survey Question 14 .............................................................................................. 43
Table 30. Public Access Survey Question 15 .............................................................................................. 43
Table 31. Public Access Survey Question 16 .............................................................................................. 43
Table 32. Public Access Survey Question 17 .............................................................................................. 43
Table 33. Public Access Survey Question 18 .............................................................................................. 44
Table 34. Public Access Survey Question 19 .............................................................................................. 44
Table 35. Public Access Survey Question 20 .............................................................................................. 44
Table 36. Public Access Survey Question 21 .............................................................................................. 45
Table 37. Public Access Survey Question 22 .............................................................................................. 45
Table 38. Web Map Public Comment Summary .......................................................................................... 47
Table 39. Evaluated Signalized Intersections .............................................................................................. 53
Table 40. Evaluated Sidewalk Corridors ...................................................................................................... 55
List of Figures
Figure 1. ADA Accessibility Survey Advertising Materials ............................................................................. 7
Figure 2. City of Yuma Web Map ................................................................................................................... 8
Figure 3. Yuma Click & Fix .......................................................................................................................... 12
Figure 4. No Pedestrian Crossing Signs ...................................................................................................... 21
Figure 5. On-Street Accessible Parking Evaluated in 2024 ......................................................................... 23
Figure 6. On-Street Accessible Parking Block Diagram ............................................................................... 25
Figure 7. PROWAG Figure R305.2.5 Pedestrian At-grade Rail Crossings .................................................. 27
Figure 8. Maintenance versus Alteration Projects........................................................................................ 28
Figure 9. Public Comment Location Map ..................................................................................................... 46
Figure 10. Facility Inventory Map ................................................................................................................. 48
Figure 11. Evaluated Buildings Map ............................................................................................................ 49
Figure 12. Evaluated Recreation Facilities Map........................................................................................... 50
Figure 13. Evaluated Parks Map ................................................................................................................. 51
Figure 14. Evaluated Signalized Intersections Map ..................................................................................... 52
Figure 15. Public Rights-of-Way Sidewalk Corridors ................................................................................... 54
iii

Abbreviations
ABA – Architectural Barriers Act
ADA – Americans with Disabilities Act
ADAAG – Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines
CFR – Code of Federal Regulations
CIP – Capital Improvement Program
DOJ – United States Department of Justice
FHWA – Federal Highway Administration
MUTCD – Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices
PROWAG – 2023 Final Public Rights-of-Way Accessibility Guidelines
PSA – Programs, Services, and Activities
UFAS – Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards
iv

1.0 Introduction
1.1 Purpose
The purpose of this Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Self-Evaluation and Transition Plan is to summarize the
activities completed to-date related to ADA compliance and to create a roadmap for the City of Yuma to update their
ADA Transition Plan over time. Prioritization methodology for evaluating and implementing improvements was
developed based on the applicable ADA Standards and Public Rights-of-Way Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG)
and the details are provided in this document.
This document includes an overview of the ADA and provides possible solutions for the City of Yuma based on
guidance from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) to improve
accessibility for the public.
1.2 Legislative Mandate
The ADA is a civil rights law that mandates equal opportunity for individuals with disabilities and prohibits discrimination
in access to jobs, public accommodations, government services, public transportation, and telecommunications. The
ADA is divided into five titles:
• Title I: Employment
• Title II: Public Services
• Title III: Public Accommodations
• Title IV: Telecommunications
• Title V: Miscellaneous Provisions
Title II of the ADA also requires that all programs, services, and activities (PSAs) of public entities provide equal
access for individuals with disabilities.
The City of Yuma plans to complete a comprehensive evaluation of its PSAs to determine the extent that individuals
with disabilities may be restricted in their access.
1.3 ADA Self-Evaluation and Transition Plan Development Requirements and Process
The City of Yuma is obligated to observe all requirements of Title I in its employment practices; Title II in its policies,
programs, and services; any parts of Titles IV and V that apply to the City and its programs, services, or facilities; and
all requirements specified in the applicable ADA Standards and PROWAG that apply to facilities and other physical
holdings.
Title II has the broadest impact on the City. Included in Title II are administrative requirements for all government
entities employing more than 50 people. These administrative requirements are:
• Completion of a Self-Evaluation.
• Providing notice to the public about the ADA.
• Adoption and publishing of a Titel II grievance procedure.
• Designation of an employee who is responsible for overseeing Title II compliance; and
• Development of a Transition Plan to schedule the removal of the barriers uncovered by the Self-Evaluation
process. The Transition Plan will become a working document until all barriers have been addressed.
1

This document describes the process developed to complete the evaluation of the City of Yuma’s PSAs and facilities,
provides possible solutions to remove programmatic barriers, and presents a Transition Plan for the modification of
facilities and public rights-of way to improve accessibility, which will guide the planning and implementation of
necessary program and facility modifications. The ADA Self-Evaluation and Transition Plan is significant in that it
establishes the City’s ongoing commitment to the development and maintenance of PSAs and facilities that
accommodate all its residents.
1.4 Discrimination and Accessibility
Program accessibility means that, when viewed in its entirety, each program is readily accessible to and usable by
individuals with disabilities. Program accessibility is necessary not only for individuals with mobility needs, but also to
individuals with sensory and cognitive disabilities.
Accessibility applies to all aspects of a program or service, including but not limited to physical access,
advertisement, orientation, eligibility, participation, testing or evaluation, provision of auxiliary aids, transportation,
policies, and communication.
The following are examples of elements that should be evaluated for barriers to accessibility:
1.4.1 Physical Barriers
• Parking
• Path of travel to, throughout, and between buildings and amenities
• Doors
• Service counters
• Restrooms
• Drinking fountains
• Public telephones
• Path of travel along sidewalk corridors within the public rights-of-way
• Access to pedestrian equipment at signalized intersections
1.4.2 Programmatic Barriers
• Building signage
• Customer communication and interaction
• Non-compliant sidewalks or curb ramps
• Emergency notifications, alarms, and visible signals
• Participation opportunities for City sponsored events.
1.4.3 Ongoing Accessibility Improvements
City services, policies, practices, programs, activities, and facilities evaluated during the Self-Evaluation will continue
to be evaluated on an ongoing basis, and the ADA Transition Plan will be revised to account for modifications which
have been or will be completed since the initial Self-Evaluation. This Plan will be posted on the City's website for
review and consideration by the public.
1.4.4 City of Yuma Approach
The purpose of the Transition Plan is to provide the framework for achieving equal access to the City of Yuma’s
PSAs within a reasonable timeframe. The City's elected officials and staff believe that accommodating people with
disabilities is essential to good customer service, ensures the quality-of-life residents seek to enjoy, and guides future
2

improvements. This Plan has been prepared after careful study of select City programs, services, activities, and
evaluations of select City facilities.
The City of Yuma should make reasonable modifications in PSAs when the modifications are necessary to avoid
discrimination based on disability, unless the City can demonstrate making the modifications will fundamentally alter
the nature of the program, service, or activity. The City of Yuma will not place surcharges on individuals with
disabilities to cover the cost involved in making PSAs accessible.
1.5 Exceptions and Exemptions
Per the ADA Title II Regulations, a public entity shall operate each PSA so that the service, program, or activity,
when viewed in its entirety, is readily accessible to and usable to individual with disabilities. However, a public entity
is not required to:
• Make each of its existing facilities accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities.
• Take any action that would threaten or destroy the historic significance of a historic property.
• Take any action that it can demonstrate would result in a fundamental alteration in the nature of a service,
program, or activity or in undue financial and administrative burdens.
• Permit an individual to participate in or benefit from the services, programs, or activities of that public entity
when that individual poses a direct threat to the health or safety of others.
The sections below describe these exceptions and exemptions. In the event the City determines a proposed action
would generate undue financial or administrative burden, create hazardous conditions for other people, or threaten or
destroy the historic significance of a historic property, a municipality has a responsibility to communicate and
document the decision, and the methodology used. If an action would result in such an alteration or such burdens, a
municipality shall take any other actions which would not result in such an alteration or such burdens but would
nevertheless ensure individuals with disabilities receive the benefits or services provided by the City.
Existing Facilities
A public entity is not required to make structural changes in existing facilities where other methods are effective in
making its services, programs, or activities readily accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities. In
choosing among available methods for meeting the compliance requirements, a public entity shall give priority to
those methods that offer services, programs, and activities to qualified individuals with disabilities in the most
integrated setting appropriate.
Historic Significance
In determining whether an alteration would threaten or destroy the historic significance of a historic property, the City
should first confirm if the property is a qualified historic building or facility, which is defined by the ADA as a “building
or facility that is listed in or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places, or designated as historic
under an appropriate state or local law.” Based on a search of the National Register of Historic Places NPGallery
Database and the associated geodatabase, there are more than 50 registered historical places within the City of
Yuma, but there may be other documentation available not provided on these websites. A map of these properties is
provided on the City website.
• Click here for the National Register of Historic Places website.
• Click here for the National Register of Historic Places database.
• Click here for the City of Yuma Historic Site and District Boundaries Map.
3

The City has established the Design and Historic Review Commission (DHRC). The DHRC holds a variety of
responsibilities with the goal of promoting historical preservation in the City. The Commission and its members
review plans for development in the City’s Aesthetic Overlay (the gateways to the City) and within the City’s three
historic districts. Commission members use state and federal guidelines for development in addition to local City-
approved neighborhood specific historic district and design guidelines. The Design and Historic Review Commission
should take the ADA into consideration when providing recommendations to ensure the current standards are being
met when facilities are altered.
Fundamental Alterations and Undue Burdens
In determining whether an alteration would impose an undue financial or administrative burden on a covered entity,
factors to be considered include:
i. the nature and cost of the alteration needed.
ii. the overall financial resources of the facility or facilities involved in the provision of the reasonable
accommodation; the number of persons employed at such facility; the effect on expenses and resources, or
the impact otherwise of such accommodation upon the operation of the facility.
iii. the overall financial resources of the covered entity; the overall size of the business of a covered entity with
respect to the number of its employees; the number, type, and location of its facilities; and
iv. the type of operation or operations of the covered entity, including the composition, structure, and functions
of the workforce of such entity; the geographic separateness, administrative, or fiscal relationship of the
facility or facilities in question to the covered entity.
Direct Threat
In determining whether an individual poses a direct threat to the health or safety of others, a public entity must make
an individualized assessment, based on reasonable judgment that relies on current medical knowledge or on the best
available objective evidence, to ascertain: the nature, duration, and severity of the risk; the probability that the
potential injury will actually occur; and whether reasonable modifications of policies, practices, or procedures or the
provision of auxiliary aids or services will mitigate the risk.
1.6 New Construction and Alterations
Per the ADA Title II Regulations, if the start date for construction is on or after March 15, 2012, all newly constructed
or altered state and local government facilities must comply with the 2010 ADA Standards. Before that date, the 1991
ADA Standards (without the elevator exemption), the Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards (UFAS), or the 2010
ADA Standards may be used for such projects when the start of construction commences on or after September 15,
2010 (see Table 1).
Table 1. Summary of Applicable Standards
Compliance Date for New Construction or Applicable Standards
Alterations
Before September 15, 2010 1991 ADA Standards or UFAS
On or after September 15, 2010, and
1991 ADA Standards, UFAS, or 2010 ADA Standards
before March 15, 2012
On or after March 15, 2012 2010 ADA Standards
The U.S. Access Board is an independent federal agency that advances accessibility through leadership in
accessible design and the development of accessibility guidelines and standards. On July 26, 1991, the U.S. Access
4

Board published the original Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines (ADAAG), which were also
adopted as standards by the DOJ on the same day. Between 1994 and 2002, the U.S. Access Board worked to
update the 1991 ADAAG to include supplements covering state and local government facilities, building elements
designed for children’s use, play areas, and recreation facilities. The U.S. Access Board issued the updated ADA
and ABA Accessibility Guidelines as a final rule on July 23, 2004 (2004 ADAAG).
The most recent standard is the 2010 ADA Standards, which sets the minimum requirements – both scoping and
technical – for newly designed and constructed or altered state and local government facilities, public
accommodations, and commercial facilities to be readily accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities. It is
effectuated from 28 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 35.151 and the 2004 ADAAG. However, the FHWA and DOJ
recommend using PROWAG for designing facilities within the public rights-of-way as a best practice until it is
adopted at the federal level.
2010 ADA Standards
The DOJ’s revised regulations for Titles II and III of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) were
published in the Federal Register on September 15, 2010. These adopted, revised regulations are
enforceable accessibility standards called the 2010 ADA Standards. On March 15, 2012, compliance with
the 2010 ADA Standards was required for new construction and alterations under Titles II and III. March 15,
2012 is also the compliance date for using the 2010 ADA Standards for program accessibility and barrier
removal.
Public Rights-of-Way Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG)
The U.S. Access Board recently published new guidelines under the ADA and the Architectural Barriers Act
(ABA) that address access to sidewalks and streets, crosswalks, curb ramps, pedestrian signals, on-street
parking, and other components of public rights-of-way. These guidelines also review shared use paths,
which are designed primarily for use by bicyclists and pedestrians for transportation and recreation
purposes. The Accessibility Guidelines for Pedestrian Facilities in the Public Rights-of-Way (PROWAG)
provide minimum guidelines for the accessibility of pedestrian facilities in the public rights-of-way. When
these guidelines are adopted, with or without modifications, as accessibility standards in regulations issued
by other federal agencies implementing the ADA, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and the ABA,
compliance with those enforceable accessibility standards is mandatory. The final rule was published on
August 8, 2023, and became effective on September 7, 2023. PROWAG is the recommended best practice
and can be considered the state of the practice that could be followed for areas not fully addressed by the
2010 ADA Standards.
The U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) published its Final Rule on Transportation for Individuals with
Disabilities: Adoption of Accessibility Standards for Pedestrian Facilities in the Public Right-of-Way
(PROWAG) as the DOT’s regulatory standards for new construction and alterations of transit stops in the
public right-of-way. The Final Rule became effective on January 17, 2025. The DOT will also be determining
how to ensure that there is no “conflict” between PROWAG and the 11th Edition of Manual on Uniform Traffic
Control Devices for Streets and Highways (MUTCD).
Until DOJ adopt accessibility standards for pedestrian facilities in the public right-of-way, public entities have
some degree of flexibility in determining how they will comply with the general obligation under Title II of the
ADA (to operate each service, program, or activity so that it is “readily accessible and useable by”
individuals with disabilities). Public entities are not required to adopt the Final PROWAG at this time but
may turn to different resources for guidance (e.g., Final PROWAG, DOJ’s 2010 ADA Standards for buildings
and sites, and other accessibility resources). However, it is recommended that the City of Yuma adopt
PROWAG so that it becomes an enforceable document for all City projects within the public rights-of-way,
regardless of PROWAG’s adoption status at the state and federal level.
5

When DOT undertakes its own rulemaking to adopt PROWAG as enforceable standards, DOT will
determine how to ensure that there is no “conflict” within its own regulations (i.e., no inconsistencies
between the adopted public rights-of-way accessibility standards and the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control
Devices for Streets and Highways (MUTCD).
Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways (MUTCD)
The MUTCD defines the standards used by road managers nationwide to install and maintain traffic control
devices on all streets, highways, pedestrian and bicycle facilities, and site roadways open to public travel.
The MUTCD is published by the FHWA under 23 CFR, Part 655, Subpart F and is a compilation of national
standards for all traffic control devices, including road markings, highway signs, and traffic signals. It is
updated periodically to accommodate the nation’s changing transportation needs and address new safety
technologies, traffic control tools, and traffic management techniques. On December 19, 2023, a Final Rule
adopting the 11th Edition of the MUTCD was published in the Federal Register with an effective date of
January 18, 2024.
1.7 Existing City Programs that Implement ADA Upgrades
The City of Yuma currently implements ADA compliant designs through the following efforts:
• Inclusive Play Project: In 2022, the City began working on improvements to the Stewart Vincent Wolfe Creative
Playground (282 N. 12th Avenue) with the addition of a new inclusive play area. The inclusive playground
exceeds the minimum standards of accessibility to ensure every child can fully engage with the equipment
without limitations. Click here for more information on the project.
• Multi-use Paths: As part of the 2018 Yuma Bikeways Plan, 53 miles of bike paths are proposed to be added to
the existing City network in addition to proposed bike lanes along existing or new roadways. Bike paths (also
referred to as multi-use paths) are off-street paved paths that are physically separated from motorized traffic by
an open space or barrier. Bike paths attract recreational users such as joggers, walkers, and other non-
motorized users. Typically, bike paths are constructed of concrete or asphalt and are built to a standard width of
10 feet.
[Remainder of page intentionally left blank]
6

2.0 Public Outreach
2.1 ADA Advisory Commission
In July 2023, the City established an ADA Advisory Commission for the purpose of advising the City Administrator
and City staff on matters pertaining to the needs and interests of, and the barriers negatively impacting, the disability
community. This City code text amendment ensures the City is Safe and Prosperous, Respected and Responsible,
Connected and Engaged, and Active and Appealing by making the Yuma community accessible to those who
experience disabilities, providing an avenue to communicate with the City regarding needs of disabled
persons, and ensuring essential services are available to the public.
The Commission is comprised of seven members to be appointed by the Mayor and City Council. The City of Yuma’s
ADA Coordinator shall serve as secretary to the Commission. The City will work with the Commission members to
determine the frequency at which the Commission will meet and will also meet on the fourth Tuesday of the first
month of every quart of the year. The City plans to solicit feedback on the Self-Evaluation and Transition Plan directly
from the Commission and work with the Commission to determine the best approach for receiving feedback from the
disability community.
2.2 Web Survey
The City developed a web survey in both English and Spanish that was open to the public. The survey was designed
to help locate areas of greatest concern to the public and help provide better access to the community. The survey
consisted of 23 questions related to City buildings, recreational facilities, parks, public rights-of-way, programs,
services, and activities. The survey was made available on the City’s website and additional advertising was done
through flyers, business cards, news release, social media, ADA Commission Public Service Announcement, booth
at the Downtown Christmas event, and coordination with disability advocates, individuals with disabilities, and other
stakeholders as part of the January 28, 2025 ADA Commission Meeting. Feedback was documented between the
start date of December 1, 2024, and end date of February 28, 2025. See Figure 1 for examples of advertising
materials.
Figure 1. ADA Accessibility Survey Advertising Materials
The survey garnered 126 responses. West Wetlands Park, Historic Yuma Civic Center, Yuma Theatre, Smucker
Park, City Hall, and Yuma Art Center are some of the most visited facilities by respondents. 62% of respondents
answered positively when asked about the accessibility of the City’s public facilities, such as public buildings, parks,
7

public rights-of-way sidewalk, curb ramps, and signalized intersections. 74% of respondents answered positively
when asked about any communications barriers. Some recurring accessibility concerns included:
• Lack of available accessible parking spaces
• Lack of accessible routes and/or maintenance of existing accessible routes and sidewalks
• Lack of adult changing tables
• Wood chips in playgrounds not accessible for wheelchairs
• Inaccessible push buttons
Response summaries for the web survey are included in Appendix A.
2.3 Web Map
The City also developed an online map to allow the public to identify specific locations where they experience issues
related to accessibility, safety, connectivity, or suggestions for accessibility improvements that are needed at the
City’s facilities (see Figure 2). The map was made available on the City’s website. Feedback was documented
between the start date of December 1, 2024, and the end date of February 28, 2025.
Figure 2. City of Yuma Web Map
The responses fell into three main categories where the public is facing barriers to access:
• Locations with difficult to access.
• Locations where difficult crossings exist at intersections.
• Locations where sidewalk obstructions are present.
A full summary of the responses for the web map is included in Appendix A.
Input from the web survey and map will be used to:
• Identify and prioritize accessibility barriers across City spaces.
• Guide planning and budgeting for future ADA improvements.
• Inform Council decisions on capital projects and policy.
• Support ADA Advisory Commission recommendations and ongoing oversight.
• Align City efforts with community accessibility needs.
8

2.4 On-going Public Outreach
The City believes that continued community engagement ensures that the ADA Advisory Commission remains
responsive, informed, and focused on the needs of those most impacted by accessibility barriers. Ongoing public
input helps guide meaningful change and reinforces the City’s commitment to inclusion for all.
The web survey is just the beginning and there will be continued outreach through events and meetings. The City
intends to gather input regularly at public events and Commission meetings, engage stakeholders to reach broader
and underrepresented communities, share updates and progress to promote transparency, and keep the
conversation going to build trust and support long-term improvements.
The City will also be hosting open houses and will have open public comment periods as part of the Master
Transportation Plan (MTP) update. The MTP includes policies and investment strategies for traditional roadway
improvement; but as a multimodal plan, it also outlines enhancements to public transportation, bicycle facilities,
pedestrian environments, and other mobility and accessibility functions. The City will work with the ADA Advisory
Commission to solicit feedback from the disability community.
[Remainder of page intentionally left blank]
9

3.0 Self-Evaluation and Summary of Observations
The City of Yuma’s ADA Self-Evaluation will be updated in a future project phase to reflect the results of a
comprehensive review of the programs, services, and activities, and policies and practices the City uses to
implement its various programs, services, and activities. The Self-Evaluation will also be updated to include
observations from the remaining facility evaluations.
3.1 Services, Policies, and Practices Review
Under the ADA, the City of Yuma is required to complete a Self-Evaluation of the City’s services, policies, and
practices and operate each service, program, and activity so that it is readily accessible and useable by individuals
with disabilities. The Self-Evaluation identifies and provides possible solutions to those services, policies, and
practices that are inconsistent with Title II requirements. To be compliant, the Self-Evaluation should consider all the
City’s programs, services, and activities, as well as the policies and practices the City uses to implement its various
programs, services, and activities.
To comply with the requirements of the ADA, the City must take corrective measures to achieve program
accessibility through several methods, including, but not limited to:
1) Relocation of programs to accessible facilities.
2) Modifications to existing programs so they are offered in an accessible manner.
3) Structural methods such as altering an existing facility.
4) Policy modifications to ensure nondiscrimination; and
5) Auxiliary aids provided to produce effective communication.
When choosing a method of providing program access, the City should attempt to give priority to the method that
promotes inclusion among all users, including individuals with disabilities.
PSAs offered by the City to the public must be accessible. Accessibility applies to all aspects of a program, services,
or activity, including advertisement, orientation, eligibility, participation, testing or evaluation, physical access,
provision of auxiliary aids, transportation, policies, and communication.
However, the City does not have to take any action that will result in a fundamental alteration in the nature of a
program or activity, create a hazardous condition for other people, or result in an undue financial and/or
administrative burden. This determination should generally be made by the ADA/504 Coordinator and/or an
authorized designee of the City, such as the City Manager or their designee, and must be accompanied by a written
statement detailing the reasons for reaching the determination.
The determination of undue burden must be based on an evaluation of all resources available for use. If a barrier
removal action is judged unduly burdensome, the City must consider all other options for providing access that will
ensure that individuals with disabilities receive the benefits and services of the program or activity. This process must
be fully documented.
10

3.1.1 ADA/504 Coordinator
Under the ADA Title II, when a public entity has 50 or more employees based on an entity-wide employee total count,
the entity is required to designate at least one (1) qualified responsible employee to coordinate compliance with ADA
requirements. The name, office address, and telephone number of this individual must be available and advertised
to employees and the public. This allows for clear identification of the person in the City able to assist with questions
and concerns regarding disability discrimination.
The City of Yuma has appointed Kathryn Roman as ADA/504 Coordinator. Below is the ADA/504 Coordinator’s
contact information.
Kathryn Roman, ADA/504 Coordinator
Administrative Specialist
Engineering
155 W. 14th Street
Yuma, AZ 85364
Office: 928-373-4520
Relay: 7-1-1
ADA@yumaaz.gov
The ADA/504 Coordinator contact information must be provided to interested parties. The following distribution
methods are recommended:
• Post on the City website.
• Prominently display in common areas that are accessible to all employees and areas open to the public.
• Provide in materials that are distributed by the City for meetings and events where requests for auxiliary aids or
services for effective communication might be needed; and
• Provide in materials that are distributed by the City where ADA questions or concerns may arise.
3.1.2 Roles and Responsibilities of the ADA/504 Coordinator
Below is a list of qualifications for ADA Coordinators that are recommended by DOJ:
• Familiarity with the entity’s structures, activities, and employees.
• Knowledge of the ADA and other laws addressing the rights of people with disabilities, such as Section 504 of
the Rehabilitation Act.
• Experience with people with a broad range of disabilities.
• Knowledge of various alternative formats and alternative technologies that enable individuals with disabilities to
communicate, participate, and perform tasks.
• Ability to work cooperatively with local entities and people with disabilities.
• Familiarity with any local disability advocacy groups or other disability groups.
• Skills and training in negotiation and mediation; and
• Organizational and analytical skills.
The responsibilities of the ADA/504 Coordinator include coordinating the City’s efforts to comply with Title II and
investigating any complaints related to potential violations of Title II. The role of the ADA Coordinator typically
includes being the primary contact when members of the public request an auxiliary aid or service for effective
communication, such as a sign language interpreter or documents in Braille. An effective ADA Coordinator will be
11

able to efficiently assist people with disabilities with their questions. These roles and responsibilities are consistent
with the guidance in the DOJ’s Title II Toolkit. Click here for the DOJ Title II Toolkit.
3.1.3 ADA Grievance Policy, Procedure, and Form with Appeal Process for the ADA
Local governments with 50 or more employees are required to adopt and publish procedures for resolving grievances
in a prompt and fair manner that may arise under Title II of the ADA. The DOJ’s Title II Toolkit suggests the grievance
procedure include:
• A description of how and where a complaint under Title II may be filed.
• If a written complaint is required, a statement notifying potential complainants that alternative means of filing will
be available to people with disabilities who require such an alternative.
• A description of the time frames and processes to be followed by the complainant and the government entity.
• Information on how to appeal an adverse decision; and
• A statement of how long the complaint files will be retained.
The City of Yuma Grievance Policy, Procedure, and Form with Appeal Process for the ADA are provided on the City
website:
• Click here for the City’s Grievance Procedure.
• Click here for the City’s Grievance Form.
The City also uses Yuma Click & Fix (powered by SeeClickFix) to receive ADA grievances (see Figure 3). Click here
to access Yuma Click & Fix. Yuma Click & Fix is a comprehensive and robust 311, request management, and
resident engagement solution that is integrable with the most widely used Esri and asset management systems.
Yuma Click & Fix will be used to maintain an ADA grievance log as well.
Figure 3. Yuma Click & Fix
12

3.1.4 Public Notice Under the ADA
The ADA public notice requirement applies to all state and local governments covered by Title II, including entities
with fewer than 50 employees. The target audience for the public notice includes applicants, beneficiaries, and other
people interested in the entity’s programs, services, and activities. This notice is required to include information
regarding Title II of the ADA and how it applies to the programs, services, and activities of the public entity. The DOJ
Title II Toolkit suggests the ADA notice should include brief statements about:
• Employment.
• Effective communication.
• Making reasonable modifications to policies and programs.
• Not placing surcharges on modifications or auxiliary aids and services; and
• Filing complaints.
The notice should also include the name and contact information of the ADA/504 Coordinator. Publishing and
publicizing the ADA notice is not a one-time requirement. State and local government entities should provide the
information on an ongoing basis, whenever necessary.
The City of Yuma Public Notice Under the ADA is provided on the City website. Click here for the City’s ADA Notice.
3.2 Program, Services, and Activities Inventory
The City of Yuma plans to compile a list of all City services, policies, programs, and activities required to be reviewed
for compliance with Title II of the ADA. The City plans to evaluate the following for compliance:
• Department-specific handbooks, policies, procedures, and guidelines,
• Standard operating procedures
• Ordinances
• Reasonable modification request policy, procures, and request form
• Non-discrimination assurance
• Non-discrimination language for non-federal contracts, agreements, and waivers
• Non-discrimination policy statement
• Alternate format policy, procedure, and request form
• Effective communication policy, procedure, and request form
• Meeting agendas and minutes
• Videos
• Design standards
• Emergency management documents
• Service animal guidance/policy
• Event planning guidance/policy/checklist
• Event ticketing guidance/policy
• Other power-driven mobility device guidance/policy
• Retaliation and coercion policies
13

3.3 Facilities Review
A Self-Evaluation was conducted on the following facilities:
• 9 of 20 buildings.
• 4 of 10 recreational facilities.
• 22 of 42 parks.
• 46 of 89 signalized intersections.
• 33 miles of 652 miles of sidewalk corridors and all unsignalized intersections, driveways, pedestrian at-grade
railroad crossings, and on-street parking along the sidewalk corridors.
• 15 on-street accessible parking spaces.
The following sections summarize the observations. The remaining facility evaluations will be completed in future
phases as specified in Section 6.0 Conclusion and Next Steps.
3.3.1 Buildings
The City of Yuma owns and maintains 20 buildings with public access (see Facility Inventory Map in Appendix B).
Table 2 is a list of all City of Yuma-owned buildings evaluated in 2024 (see Evaluated Facility Maps in Appendix C).
Table 3 is a list of City of Yuma-owned buildings that will be evaluated in a future phase. Building evaluations were
based on the applicable ADA standards in effect at the time of construction or alteration:
• Properties constructed before September 15, 2010 will be reviewed against the 1991 ADA Standards for
Accessible Design (ADA Standards) or Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards (UFAS).
• Properties constructed between September 15, 2010 and March 15, 2012 will be reviewed against the 1991
ADA Standards, UFAS, or the 2010 ADA Standards.
• Properties constructed after March 15, 2012 will be reviewed against the 2010 ADA Standards.
Table 2. Summary of Buildings Reviewed in 2024
Location Name Property Address
1. City Hall One City Plaza
2. City of Yuma Engineering & Public Works Department 155 W 14th Street
3. City of Yuma Prosecutors 190 W 14th Street
4. Facilities Warehouse 194 W 14th Street
5. Martin Luther King Jr Youth Career Center 300 S 13th Avenue
6. Thomas F. Allt Utilities Complex 270 W 13th Street
7. Yuma Municipal Court 1515 S 2nd Avenue
8. Yuma Police Araby East Substation 6390 E 26th Street
9. Yuma Police Department 1500 S 1st Avenue
14

Table 3. Summary of Buildings to be Reviewed in Future Phase
Location Name Property Address
10. City of Yuma Warehouse Surplus Auction 190 W 14th Street
11. Classroom Fire Station #5 / AWC 6490 E 26th Street
12. Fire Station #1 353 S 3rd Avenue
13. Fire Station #2 3284 S Avenue A
14. Fire Station #3 508 E 25th Street
15. Fire Station #4 2850 W 16th Street
16. Fire Station #5 6490 E 26th Street
17. Harvest Preschool Childcare 1793 S 1st Avenue
18. Household Hazardous Waste 1473 S 2nd Avenue
19. New Fleet Services 265 W 13th Street
20. Riverside Outdoor Education Center Riverside Park, 50 Prison Hill Road
Buildings: Self-Evaluation Observations
Areas that were evaluated for each building included parking lots, path of travel from the parking lot to the building,
access into the building, signage, drinking fountains, telephones, bathrooms, and counter heights. Common
observations identified included:
• Accessible route to the building entrances contains excessive slopes and non-compliant curb ramps.
• Accessible parking contains excessive slopes, non-compliant dimensions, and non-compliant signage.
• Non-compliant restrooms and restroom accessories.
• Signage is missing, non-compliant, or incorrectly located.
• Non-compliant accessible height service counters.
3.3.2 Recreation Facilities
The City of Yuma owns and maintains 10 recreational facilities (see Facility Inventory Map in Appendix B). Table 4
is a list of all City of Yuma-owned recreational facilities evaluated in 2024 (see Evaluated Facility Maps in Appendix
C). Table 5 is a list of City of Yuma-owned recreational facilities that will be evaluated in a future phase.
Recreational facility evaluations were based on the applicable ADA standards in effect at the time of construction or
alteration:
• Properties constructed before September 15, 2010 will be reviewed against the 1991 ADA Standards for
Accessible Design (ADA Standards) or Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards (UFAS).
• Properties constructed between September 15, 2010 and March 15, 2012 will be reviewed against the 1991
ADA Standards, UFAS, or the 2010 ADA Standards.
• Properties constructed after March 15, 2012 will be reviewed against the 2010 ADA Standards.
15

Table 4. Summary of Recreational Facilities Reviewed in 2024
Location Name Property Address
1. Carver Pool 1250 W 5th Street
2. Joe Henry Optimist Center (JHOC) 1793 S. 1st Avenue
3. Marcus Pool 5th Street & 5th Avenue
4. North End Community Center 160 E. 1st Street
Table 5. Summary of Recreational Facilities Reviewed in Future Phase
Location Name Property Address
5. Clymer Recreation Center 553 S. Orange Avenue
6. Historic Yuma Theater 254 S. Main Street
7. Kennedy Pool 890 E 24th Street
8. Yuma Arts Center 254 S. Main Street
9. Yuma Civic Center 1440 W Desert Hills Drive
10. Yuma Readiness & Community Center 6550 E 24th Street
Recreational Facilities: Self-Evaluation Observations
Areas that were evaluated for each recreational facility included parking lots, path of travel from the parking lot to the
building, access into the building, signage, drinking fountains, telephones, bathrooms, and counter heights.
Common observations identified included:
• Accessible route to the entrances and amenities contains excessive slopes and non-compliant curb ramps.
• Accessible parking contains excessive slopes, non-compliant dimensions, and non-compliant signage.
• Accessible route around pool decks and splash pads contain excessive slopes and openings.
• Restrooms missing compliant toilet, shower, and dressing room compartments.
3.3.3 Parks
The City of Yuma owns and maintains 42 parks (see Facility Inventory Map in Appendix B). Table 6 is a list of all
City of Yuma-owned parks evaluated in 2024 (see Evaluated Facility Maps in Appendix C). Table 7 is a list of City
of Yuma-owned parks that will be evaluated in a future phase. Park evaluations were based on the applicable ADA
standards in effect at the time of construction or alteration:
• Properties constructed before September 15, 2010 will be reviewed against the 1991 ADA Standards for
Accessible Design (ADA Standards) or Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards (UFAS).
• Properties constructed between September 15, 2010 and March 15, 2012 will be reviewed against the 1991
ADA Standards, UFAS, or the 2010 ADA Standards.
• Properties constructed after March 15, 2012 will be reviewed against the 2010 ADA Standards.
16

Table 6. Summary of Parks Reviewed in 2024
Location Name Property Address
1. Armed Forces Park 281 Gila Street
2. Barkley Ranch Park 2750 S 48th Drive
3. Caballero Park (includes Clubhouse) / Friendship Park /
Jennifer Wilson Park (North Caballero Park) / Ray Kroc West 34th Street
Sports Complex
4. Carver Park S 13th Ave & W 5th Street
5. Clymer Park (includes Recreation Center) 533 S. Orange Avenue
6. Desert Hills Golf Course (includes pro shop, restaurant, 1245 W. Desert Hills Drive
and snack shack with public restrooms)
7. Desert Ridge Park 26th Place & Avenue 7 3/4 E
8. Gateway Park 1st Street & Gila
9. Joe Henry Athletic Complex / Joe Henry Memorial Park 2310 W. Colorado Street
10. Kiwanis Park 8th Street & Magnolia Avenue
11. Marcus Park 5th Street & 5th Avenue
12. Ocotillo Park 42nd Place & Jojoba Avenue
13. Pacific Avenue Athletic Complex 1700 E 8th St, Yuma, AZ
14. Ponderosa Park 26th Street & 29th Drive
15. Riverside Park Prison Hill Road & Giss Parkway
16. Sanguinetti Memorial Park 8th Avenue & 23rd Street
17. Sunrise Optimist Park 20th Street & 45th Avenue
18. Terraces Park 2601 E. View Parkway
19. Victoria Meadows Park 23rd Street & 20th Drive
20. West Wetlands Park / Centennial Beach 282 N. 12th Avenue
21. Winsor Rotary Park 20th Street & Avenue B 1/2
22. Yuma Valley Park 3162 W. 24th Street
Table 7. Summary of Parks to be Reviewed in Future Phase
Location Name Property Address
23. Bark Park 1705 E. Palo Verde Street
24. Centennial Athletic Complex 2650 W. 20th Street
25. Cibola Athletic Complex 4100 20th Street
26. Desert Hills Golf Course – Par 3 (includes double-wide 1301 W. 32nd Street
trailer)
27. Elena Orendain Curtis Athletic Complex 2100 W. 28th Street
28. Hacienda Park 1 24th Lane & 18th Avenue
29. Hacienda Park 2 27th Drive & 18th Avenue
30. Hacienda Park 3 28th Lane & 18th Avenue
31. Hacienda Park 4 26th Street & 17th Avenue
32. Heritage Library Park (excludes Heritage Library, which is 3rd Street & 3rd Avenue
County owned and maintained)
17

Location Name Property Address
33. Joe Henry Optimist Center Park 1793 S. 1st Avenue
34. John Morris Cottage 385 S. 13th Avenue
35. Keegan Athletic Complex / Kennedy Athletic Complex / 23rd Street & Kennedy Lane
Kennedy Memorial Park
36. Las Casitas Park 31st Place & 28th Drive
37. Netwest Park 12th Street & 14th Avenue
38. Parkway Place Park 27th Street & 39th Drive
39. Roxaboxen Park 2nd Avenue & 8th Street
40. Saguaro Neighborhood Park 4183 Desert Willow Way
41. Smucker Memorial Park Avenue A & 28th Street
42. Valley Aquatic Center 4381 W. 18th Street
Parks: Self-Evaluation Observations
Areas that were evaluated for each park included parking lots, paths of travel from the parking lot to the park
amenities, access into facilities, signage, drinking fountains and restrooms. Common observations identified
included:
• Accessible routes contain excessive slopes and non-compliant curb ramps and ramps.
• Missing route of travel to amenity areas.
• Accessible parking contains excessive slopes, non-compliant dimensions, and non-compliant signage.
• Restrooms missing compliant accessible toilet compartments and accessories.
• Playground equipment and surfaces are non-compliant.
3.3.4 Signalized Intersections
The City of Yuma owns and maintains 89 signalized intersections (see Facility Inventory Map in Appendix B). Forty-
six (46) signalized intersections within the City of Yuma were evaluated in 2024 (see Evaluated Facility Maps in
Appendix C) and the remaining signalized intersections will be evaluated in a future phase. Signalized intersection
evaluations were based on 2023 Final PROWAG. Signalized intersection evaluations cataloged the conditions and
measurements along the pedestrian path of travel, which includes street crossings, curb ramps, sidewalk adjacent to
the curb ramps, and pedestrian signal equipment and adjacent clear spaces.
Signalized Intersections: Self-Evaluation Observations
Common curb ramp observations included changes in level at the transition to the roadway, no presence of color
contrast or texture contrast (detectable warning surfaces), excessive landing running slopes, and curb ramp landing
is not present where needed. Table 8 provides a summary of the curb ramp observations at signalized intersections.
About four (4) percent of pedestrian crossings at signalized intersections did not have pedestrian signal heads or
pedestrian push buttons. Pedestrian push buttons and signal heads were recommended to be installed at all
signalized intersection pedestrian crossings where they did not exist. Common observations associated with the
existing pedestrian push buttons included push buttons installed at locations inconsistent with PROWAG, excessive
push button clear space cross slopes, and excessive push button reach ranges. Table 9 provides a summary of the
push button observations.
18

Table 8. Summary of Curb Ramp Observations at Signalized Intersections
Curb Ramp Element Number Number Percent
Evaluated Compliant Compliant
Curb ramp contained wholly within the width of crosswalk 222 222 100%
served
Perpendicular curb ramp 48” x 48” clear area exists 119 119 100%
Curb ramp sides are flared or non-traversable where 75 75 100%
pedestrian circulation path crosses side of curb ramp
Running slope of pedestrian access route crossing 3 3 100%
median/pedestrian refuge island ≤ 5.0%
Width of pedestrian access route crossing median/pedestrian 3 3 100%
refuge island ≥ 60”
Curb ramp present where curb ramp is required 224 222 99.1%
Curb ramp sides with returned curbs are constructed at 90° 75 74 99.0%
Detectable warning surface is compliant 127 124 97.6%
Curb ramp width ≥ 48” 222 214 96.4%
Flare slope parallel to curb line ≤ 10.0% 147 127 86.0%
Surfaces: No ponding in curb ramp, landing, or flares 222 189 85.1%
Curb ramp landing cross slope ≤ 2.1% 128 103 80.5%
Change of grade between curb ramp and gutter/street ≤ 13.3% 222 177 79.7%
No obstruction in curb ramp, landing, or flares 222 175 78.8%
Curb ramp running slope ≤ 8.3% 219 162 74.0%
Curb ramp cross slope ≤ 2.1% 219 146 66.7%
Curb ramp landing running slope ≤ 2.1% 128 75 58.6%
Curb ramp landing exists 219 128 58.4%
Curb ramp contained wholly within the width of crosswalk 222 127 57.2%
served
Perpendicular curb ramp 48” x 48” clear area exists 222 81 36.5%
Curb ramp sides are flared or non-traversable where 3 1 33.3%
pedestrian circulation path crosses side of curb ramp
19

Table 9. Summary of Push Button Observations
Push Button Element Number Number Percent
Evaluated Compliant Compliant
Push button diameter 2” 328 328 100%
Clear space is ≥ 30" x 48" 208 205 98.6%
Push button orientation parallel to 328 316 96.3%
crosswalk
Push button height ≤ 48” 328 315 96.0%
Push button present where needed 342 328 95.9%
Pedestrian head present where needed 340 326 95.9%
Push button offset from curb ≤ 10’ 328 306 93.3%
Push button offset from crosswalk ≤ 5’ 328 301 91.8%
Push button reach range > 10" 328 208 63.4%
Cross slope of the clear space ≤ 2.1% 208 114 54.8%
3.3.5 Sidewalk Corridors
The City of Yuma owns and maintains approximately 652 miles of sidewalk corridors, including pedestrian street and
driveway crossings. Additionally, there is one (1) location where City-maintained sidewalk intersects an existing at-
grade railroad crossing with pedestrian access (see Facility Inventory Map in Appendix B). Approximately 33 miles
of sidewalk corridors were evaluated (see Evaluated Facility Maps in Appendix C).
The sidewalk corridor evaluations documented conditions and measurements along the pedestrian path of travel
within the City right-of-way, which includes the sidewalk, pedestrian street and driveway crossings, curb ramps, and
at-grade pedestrian railroad crossings. Sidewalk corridor evaluations were based on PROWAG.
Sidewalk Corridors: Self-Evaluation Observations
Common observations along the sidewalk corridors were excessive pedestrian access route cross slopes, vertical
surface discontinuities that caused excessive level changes, excessive driveway and crosswalk cross slopes,
permanent obstructions in the pedestrian circulation path such as power poles or utilities, and temporary obstructions
in the pedestrian circulation path such as weeds and low hanging branches. Where excessive vegetation was
present, field crews attempted to assess the condition of the underlying sidewalk. Where possible, the condition of
the underlying sidewalk was recorded; however, the City of Yuma may find additional issues with the sidewalk once
the temporary obstruction is removed.
Common curb ramp observations at unsignalized intersections and driveways along the sidewalk corridors included
no presence of color contrast or texture contrast (detectable warning surfaces), curb ramp landing is not present
where needed, and curb ramps having excessive landing running slopes and cross slopes. A summary of the
unsignalized intersection and driveway curb ramp observations is provided in Table 10.
ADA Title II Regulations (28 CFR Part 35), Section 35.150, Existing Facilities, requires that the Transition Plan
include a schedule for providing curb ramps or other sloped areas where pedestrian walks cross curbs, giving priority
20

to walkways serving entities covered by the ADA, including state and local government offices and facilities,
transportation, places of public accommodation, and employers, followed by walkways serving other areas.
Sidewalk Corridors: Possible Solutions
A crosswalk is defined by PROWAG as “that part of a roadway that is located at an intersection included within the
connections of the lateral lines of the pedestrian circulation paths on opposite sides of the highway measured from
the curbs, or in the absence of curbs, from the edges of the traversable roadway, and in the absence of a pedestrian
circulation path on one side of the roadway, the part of a roadway included within the extension of the lateral lines of
the pedestrian circulation path at right angles to the center line; or at any portion of a roadway at an intersection or
elsewhere distinctly indicated as a pedestrian crossing by pavement marking lines on the surface. Crosswalks at
intersections may be marked or unmarked.”
Curb ramps, blended transitions, or a combination of curb ramps and blended transitions should be provided in
accordance with PROWAG. If a pedestrian crossing is prohibited or not intended, the crosswalk should be closed in
accordance with PROWAG. The requirements are summarized in the sections below.
Crosswalks at Intersections
At an intersection corner, one curb ramp or blended transition shall be provided for each crosswalk, or a single
blended transition that spans all crosswalks at the intersection corner may be provided. In alterations, where existing
physical constraints make compliance with PROWAG technically infeasible, a single curb ramp shall be permitted at
the apex of the intersection corner. When alterations are made to crosswalks, curb ramps or blended transitions shall
be provided on both ends of the crosswalk where the pedestrian access route crosses a curb.
At an intersection corner where pedestrian crossing is prohibited, curb ramps or blended transitions shall not be
provided, and the pedestrian circulation path shall be either (a) separated from the roadway with landscaping or other
non-prepared surface or (b) separated from the roadway by a detectable vertical edge treatment with a bottom edge
15 inches maximum above the pedestrian circulation path (PROWAG Section R203.6.1.1).
There are three (3) signalized intersections where “No Pedestrian Crossing” signs exist on corners of the intersection
(see Figure 4). However, the required physical separation is not provided.
• East crossing of W. 16th Streer and S. Yuma Palms Parkway
• North crossing of 32nd Street and S. Avenue B
• North crossing of S. Avenue B and W. 28th Street
Figure 4. No Pedestrian Crossing Signs
21

Mid-block and Roundabout Crosswalks
At a mid-block or roundabout crosswalk, curb ramps or blended transitions shall be provided on both ends of the
crosswalk. When alterations are made to crosswalks, curb ramps or blended transitions shall be provided on both
ends of the crosswalk where the pedestrian access route crosses a curb.
At a mid-block or roundabout crosswalk where pedestrian crossing is not intended, curb ramps or blended
transitions shall not be provided, and the pedestrian circulation path shall be either (a) separated from
the roadway with landscaping or other non-prepared surface or (b) separated from the roadway by a detectable
vertical edge treatment with a bottom edge 15 inches maximum above the pedestrian circulation path (PROWAG
Section R203.6.1.2).
Crosswalk Markings
For all existing, unmarked crosswalks at unsignalized intersections, the installation of crosswalk markings has been
including the unsignalized intersection reports for budgeting purposes. However, the 11th Edition of the MUTCD
guidance states that on approaches controlled by STOP or YIELD signs, crosswalk markings should be installed
where engineering judgement indicates they are needed to direct pedestrians to the proper crossing path(s). At
uncontrolled approaches, an engineering study should be performed before a marked crosswalk is installed.
Table 10. Summary of Curb Ramp Observations at Unsignalized Intersections
Curb Ramp Element Number Number Percent
Evaluated Compliant Compliant
Running slope of pedestrian access route crossing 28 28 100%
median/pedestrian refuge island ≤ 5.0%
Curb ramp contained wholly within the width of crosswalk 586 577 98.0%
served
Curb ramp sides are flared or non-traversable where 209 204 97.6%
pedestrian circulation path crosses side of curb ramp
Curb ramp sides with returned curbs are constructed at 90° 209 204 97.6%
Perpendicular curb ramp 48” x 48” clear area exists 312 303 97.1%
Detectable warning surface is compliant 279 266 95.3%
Curb ramp present where curb ramp is required 635 586 92.3%
Surfaces: No ponding in curb ramp, landing, or flares 573 497 86.7%
Curb ramp running slope ≤ 8.3% 545 445 81.7%
Curb ramp flare slope parallel to curb line ≤ 10.0% 364 287 78.8%
Surfaces: Flush transition to roadway exists 586 460 78.5%
Change of grade between curb ramp and gutter/street ≤ 545 422 77.4%
13.3%
Curb ramp width ≥ 48” 545 422 77.4%
Surfaces: No obstruction in curb ramp, landing, or flares 573 427 74.5%
Width of pedestrian access route crossing 28 19 67.9%
median/pedestrian refuge island ≥ 60”
Curb ramp landing cross slope ≤ 2.1% 238 160 67.2%
Curb ramp cross slope ≤ 2.1% 545 333 61.1%
22

Curb Ramp Element Number Number Percent
Evaluated Compliant Compliant
Curb ramp landing running slope ≤ 2.1% 238 133 55.9%
Cross slope of pedestrian access route crossing 28 15 53.6%
median/pedestrian refuge island ≤ 2.1%
Detectable warning surface exists 600 279 46.5%
Curb ramp landing exists 573 238 41.5%
3.3.6 On-Street Accessible Parking
Fifteen (15) on-street accessible parking spaces within the Downtown Yuma Main Street area were evaluated along
the perimeter of six (6) blocks that run from 1st Street to E. Harold Giss Parkway (see Figure 5 and Figure 6). On-
street accessible parking evaluations were based on 2023 Final PROWAG. The evaluations documented the
conditions and measurements of the parking spaces, access aisles, and signage. On-street parallel accessible
parking spaces must connect to pedestrian access routes and perpendicular and angled on-street accessible parking
spaces must have access aisles that connect to pedestrian access routes.
Figure 5. On-Street Accessible Parking Evaluated in 2024
23

On-Street Accessible Parking: Self-Evaluation Observations
Five of the six blocks evaluated have the required minimum number of on-street accessible parking spaces, which is
a function of the total on-street parking spaces along the perimeter of each block. A summary of parking space
counts is provided in Table 11. Red highlights indicate that the required minimum number of accessible parking
spaces is not provided along the block perimeter.
A summary of existing accessible parking element compliance is provided in Table 12, and a summary of the on-
street accessible angled parking space access aisle compliance is provided in Table 13. Common observations with
the accessible parking spaces included non-compliant accessible space widths, changes in level, and horizontal
openings.
On-Street Accessible Parking: Possible Solutions
Since there are many possible solutions to bring a block into compliance, compliance reports and conceptual budget
estimates were not prepared for these locations. For example, existing parking spaces could be made accessible
with pavement marking and signage changes where no barriers exist. Depending on the location of the parking
spaces that will be made accessible, additional improvements may be necessary such as the installation of an
accessible route to connect the accessible parking spaces to amenities.
Table 11. Summary of Required On-Street Accessible Parking Totals
Block Block Perimeter Streets Total Accessible Required
No. (N, S, E, W) Spaces* Spaces Accessible
Spaces**
1 1st St, 2nd St, Main St, Madison Ave 50 4 2
2 1st St, 2nd St, Maiden Ln, Main St 15 6 1
3 2nd St, 3rd St, Main St, Madison Ave 44 1 2
4 2nd St, 3rd St, Maiden Ln, Main St 22 2 1
5 3rd St, Harold C. Giss Pkwy, Main St, Madison Ave 41 4 2
6 3rd St, Harold C. Giss Pkwy, Maiden Ln, Main St 32 4 2
*Total on-street parking spaces around the perimeter of the block.
**Red highlight indicates the required minimum number of spaces is not present.
24

Figure 6. On-Street Accessible Parking Block Diagram
Table 12. Summary of Accessible Parking Compliance
Parking Space Element Number Number Percent
Evaluated Compliant Compliant
Parallel parking space dimensions are 2 2 100%
compliant per R310.2.1 Dimensions Exception 1
Parking space is served by an access aisle 13 12 92.3%
Parking space does not have any horizontal 15 13 86.7%
openings > 1/2 inch
Parking space does not have any changes in 15 12 80.0%
level
Angled parking space width is ≥ 132 inches 13 9 69.2%
25

Table 13. Summary of Access Aisle Compliance
Access Aisle Element Number Number Percent
Evaluated Compliant Compliant
Access aisle width is ≥ 60 inches 8 8 100%
Access aisle adjoins an accessible route 8 8 100%
Constrained width where the access aisle 8 8 100%
adjoins the accessible route ≥ 36 inches
Access aisle is marked to discourage parking 8 8 100%
Access aisle does not have any gaps or 8 8 100%
openings > 1/2 inch
Access aisle does not have any vertical 8 6 75.0%
discontinuities > 1/4 inch
3.3.7 Pedestrian At-grade Railroad Crossings
One (1) pedestrian at-grade railroad crossing along 4th Avenue was evaluated for compliance with PROWAG. The
railroad crossing evaluation cataloged the conditions and measurements along the pedestrian circulation path across
the railroad tracks including transitions to and from adjacent pedestrian circulation path, flangeway gap width, and
detectable warning surfaces.
The pedestrian at-grade railroad crossing included in the evaluation is shown on a map included in Appendix C.
Pedestrian At-grade Railroad Crossings: Self-Evaluation Observations
Table 14 provides a summary of the observations identified for the evaluated railroad crossings.
Table 14. Summary of Observations at Railroad Crossings
Railroad Crossing Observation Number Number Percent
Evaluated Compliant Compliant
Surfaces: Pedestrian access route surface is level and 1 1 100%
flush with the top of rail at the outer edges of the rails
Surfaces: Surface between rails is aligned with top of rail 1 1 100%
(e.g., concrete panel present at crossing)
Flangeway gap ≤ 3 inches* 1 0 0%
Detectable warning surface extends the full width of the
pedestrian circulation path (when crossing is not located 1 0 0%
within a street)
* Assumes the tracks being crossed are subject to safety regulations at 49 CFR part 213, issued by the Federal
Railroad Administration.
Pedestrian At-grade Railroad Crossings: Possible Solutions
At pedestrian at-grade rail crossings not located within a street, detectable warning surfaces shall be located on each
side of the rail crossing. The edge of the detectable warning surface nearest the rail crossing shall be 6 feet minimum
and 15 feet maximum from the centerline of the nearest rail. Where pedestrian gates are provided, detectable
warning surfaces shall be located on the side of the gate opposite the rail. Pedestrian gates shall not
26

overlap detectable warning surfaces. Detectable warning surfaces should be 24 inches in depth in the direction of
pedestrian travel and extend the full width of the pedestrian circulation path (see Figure 7).
Figure 7. PROWAG Figure R305.2.5 Pedestrian At-grade Rail Crossings
3.4 Maintenance Versus Alterations
The United States Department of Justice (DOJ) has issued a briefing memorandum on clarification of maintenance
versus alteration projects. The information contained in the briefing memorandum is below. It is recommended that
this clarification with regard to when curb ramp installation is required as part of a project be distributed to the
appropriate City of Yuma staff.
The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) is a civil rights statute prohibiting discrimination against
persons with disabilities in all aspects of life, including transportation, based on regulations promulgated by
the United States Department of Justice (DOJ). DOJ’s regulations require accessible planning, design, and
construction to integrate people with disabilities into mainstream society. Further, these laws require that
public entities responsible for operating and maintaining the public rights-of-way do not discriminate in their
programs and activities against persons with disabilities. FHWA’s ADA program implements the DOJ
regulations through delegated authority to ensure that pedestrians with disabilities have the opportunity to
use the transportation system’s pedestrian facilities in an accessible and safe manner.
FHWA and DOJ met in March 2012 and March 2013 to clarify guidance on the ADA’s requirements for
constructing curb ramps on resurfacing projects. Projects deemed to be alterations must include curb
ramps within the scope of the project.
This clarification provides a single Federal policy that identifies specific asphalt and concrete-pavement
repair treatments that are considered to be alterations – requiring installation of curb ramps within the scope
of the project – and those that are considered to be maintenance, which do not require curb ramps at the
time of the improvement. Figure 8 provides a summary of the types of projects that fall within maintenance
versus alterations.
27

This approach clearly identifies the types of structural treatments that both DOJ and FHWA agree require
curb ramps (when there is a pedestrian walkway with a prepared surface for pedestrian use and a curb,
elevation, or other barrier between the street and the walkway) and furthers the goal of the ADA to provide
increased accessibility to the public right-of-way for persons with disabilities. This single Federal policy will
provide for increased consistency and improved enforcement.
Figure 8. Maintenance versus Alteration Projects
ADA Maintenance ADA Alterations
Crack Filling and Sealing Open-graded Surface Course
Surface Sealing Cape Seals
Chip Seals Mill & Fill/Mill & Overlay
Slurry Seals Hot In-Place Recycling
Fog Seals Microsurfacing/Thin Lift Overlay
Scrub Sealing Addition of New Layer of Asphalt
Joint Crack Seals Asphalt and Concrete
Joint Repairs Rehabilitation and Reconstruction
Dowel Bar Retrofit New Construction
Spot High-Friction Treatments
Diamond Grinding
Pavement Patching
Source: DOJ Briefing Memorandum on Maintenance versus Alteration Projects
28

4.0 Facility Conceptual Budget Estimates
4.1 Facility Conceptual Budget Estimate Overview
To identify funding sources and develop a reasonable implementation schedule, conceptual budget estimates for
only the facilities evaluated were developed for each facility type. Conceptual budget estimates for buildings,
recreational facilities, and parks were based on construction resources such as Marshall & Swift, RS Means,
Consultant’s experience with past costs for similar projects, City cost indexes, consulting with local specialty
contractors, City-provided information, and assumptions regarding future economic conditions. Conceptual budget
estimates for public rights-of-way facilities were based on recent bid tabulations from the Arizona Department of
Transportation (ADOT) construction projects.
“Conceptual Budget Estimates” are inclusive of individual accessibility improvements only and refers to the estimated
cost of labor and materials for a specific ADA compliance modification, excluding any additional costs for overhead,
profit, or project contingencies. It represents the direct expenses associated with performing the modification itself.
The cost of other components to be determined by project manager or project architect. Items include but are not
limited to project administration, construction mobilization, material testing, design analysis, design, plan review, or
contractor costs for the overall project.
All costs are in 2024 dollars. Table 15 provides a summary of the conceptual budget estimates to bring each facility
into compliance.
Table 15. Summary of Conceptual Budget Estimates
City-Owned Facility Type Total*
Buildings $ 870,300
Recreation Facilities $ 1,002,600
Parks $ 6,391,200
Signalized Intersections $ 4,927,200
Public Rights-of-Way Sidewalk $ 27,516,200
Public Rights-of-Way Unsignalized Intersections and Driveways $ 7,356,900
On-Street Accessible Parking $ 42,700
Pedestrian At-grade Rail Crossing $ 58,600
City Totals $ 48,165,700
*Table values are rounded for simplification
It is important to note that the facility conceptual budget estimates in Table 15 only include the budget to remediate
accessibility non-compliance as determined by a visual inspection of the facilities. Additional budget considerations
should be given to the following:
• Aesthetic upgrades, such as remodeling/upgrading of outdated facilities.
• Current market conditions that may affect pricing of construction materials and labor.
• Construction challenges not visible during inspection, such as underground or in-wall utilities; and
• Other factors that may affect costs.
29

It is recommended that a design professional assist the City in determining the best overall design solutions with
respect to various factors, including but not limited to existing conditions, available construction budget, and
consideration for all elements that are out of compliance in a particular area of a facility.
4.2 Implementation Schedule
This 20-year plan will serve as the implementation schedule for the Transition Plan. The City of Yuma reserves the
right to change the barrier removal priorities on an ongoing basis to allow flexibility in accommodating community
requests, petitions for reasonable modifications from persons with disabilities, and changes in City programs.
It is the intent of the City to have its ADA/504 Coordinator work together with department heads and budget staff to
determine the funding sources for barrier removal projects. Once funding is identified, the ADA/504 Coordinator will
coordinate the placement of the projects in the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) to be addressed on a fiscal year
basis.
4.3 Funding Opportunities
Several alternative funding sources are available to the City to complete the improvements in this Transition Plan. The
funding opportunities include applying for resources at the federal, state, and local levels. The following sections detail
some different funding source options.
4.3.1 Federal and State Funding
There is federal and state funding available for the City to apply through numerous agencies for various
improvements. A summary of the available funding opportunities is available on the FHWA website. Click here for
the FHWA Pedestrian Funding webpage.
Most of these programs are competitive type grants; therefore, the City of Yuma is not guaranteed to receive these
funds. It will be important for the City to track these programs to apply for the funds. Federal-aid funding programs
have specific requirements that projects must meet, and eligibility must be determined on a case-by-case basis.
4.3.2 Local Funding
There are several local funding options for the City to consider, including:
• Community Development Block Grants (CDBG)
• General fund (sales tax and bond issue)
• Scheduled/funded CIP projects that are funded through bonds
• Special tax districts – A district with the power to provide some governmental or quasi-governmental service and
to raise revenue by taxation, special assessment, or charges for services.
• ROAD Tax – local one-half percent transaction privilege tax approved by voters in 1994 for maintenance and
construction of roadways.
30

5.0 Transition Plan
Per the ADA Regulations §35.150 Existing Facilities, the City is not required to make structural changes in existing
facilities where other methods are effective in achieving compliance. In the event that structural changes to facilities
will be undertaken to achieve program accessibility, the City is required to develop a transition plan setting forth the
steps necessary to complete such changes. The transition plan shall, at a minimum:
• Identify physical obstacles in the City’s facilities that limit the accessibility of its programs or activities to
individuals with disabilities.
• Describe in detail the methods that will be used to make the facilities accessible.
• Specify the schedule for taking the steps necessary to achieve compliance with this section and, if the time
period of the transition plan is longer than one year, identify steps that will be taken during each year of the
transition period. Since the City has responsibility and/or authority over streets, roads, or walkways, a schedule
for providing curb ramps or other sloped areas where pedestrian walks cross curbs.
• Indicate the official responsible for implementation of the plan.
5.1 Transition Plan Requirements
The City has identified the physical obstacles that limit the accessibility of City programs and/or activities to
individuals with disabilities (see Section 3.3 City-Owned Facilities Review). Buildings, recreational facilities, and
park remediations will be completed in accordance with the latest version of the ADA Standards. Public rights-of-way
facility remediations will be completed in accordance with the latest version of PROWAG. Based on the conceptual
budget estimates, the transition period will take longer than one year (see Section 5.0 Facility Conceptual Budget
Estimates). Accordingly, the following steps to achieve compliance will be taken by the City on an annual basis:
1. Verify that all new projects are consistent with the ADA Standards and PROWAG. The City intends to review the
existing City design standards for consistency with ADA Standards and PROWAG to facilitate future projects
being designed and constructed in compliance.
2. Determine if barrier removal will be achieved by:
• Scheduled Maintenance Program: The City intends to remediate accessibility improvements through the
City’s annual maintenance program.
• Scheduled Improvement Projects: The City has developed a five-year CIP. The City will confirm all CIP project
scopes and design plans incorporate the accessibility improvements identified in Section 3.3 City-Owned
Facility Review.
3. For improvements that are not scheduled, develop an implementation strategy.
The official responsible for the implementation of the Yuma ADA Transition Plan will be:
David Wostenberg, PE
Director of Engineering
David.Wostenberg@yumaaz.gov
928-373-4520
31

5.4 Implementation Strategy
To implement improvements that are not included in the City’s current CIP, the City has developed an annual
implementation strategy. Minimizing risk for pedestrians is the City’s goal when determining the order in which to
implement facility improvements. There are several factors that can increase risk at a particular location, including:
• Number of existing complaints – Locations with complaints have already been identified by the public as
problem areas and should be evaluated as soon as possible to determine if the area(s) of concern are in
compliance.
• Barrier Priority – A barrier priority has been assigned to all identified physical barriers.
o Buildings, Recreational Facilities, and Parks: Barrier priorities are based on severity of non-
compliance and DOJ priorities (accessible approach and entrance; access to goods and services;
access to public toilet rooms; and access to other items such as water fountains and public
telephones).
o Public Rights-of-Way Facilities: Barrier priorities are based on severity of non-compliance and
proximity to pedestrian attractors (locations near pedestrian attractors such as hospitals, retirement
facilities, medical offices, parking garages, major employers, disability service providers, event facilities,
bus or transit stop/routes, schools, government and public facilities, parks, libraries, churches) are more
likely to have a higher risk compared to those locations without pedestrian attractors. The ADA does
not require sidewalks to be installed, but existing sidewalks must be compliant, and the accessible route
maintained in an accessible condition. Locations with existing sidewalks are at higher risk than
locations without existing sidewalks.
• Proximity to residential areas – Locations near residential areas are more likely to have a higher risk than
those locations adjacent to industrial areas where pedestrians are less likely to travel.
• Number of crashes – Locations with pedestrian-related crashes should be evaluated to determine if there
is a design issue that may be contributing to the crashes (e.g., a push button is not within the required
reach range, so pedestrians are not activating the button and crossing the street without a protected phase).
• Age of facility – Facilities constructed after July 26, 1991, are a higher risk than those constructed before
the 1991 Standards for Accessible Design were published since they were constructed out of compliance.
• Street classification – Arterials typically have higher pedestrian activity than local roadways and may be a
higher risk.
• Pedestrian/vehicle volumes – Higher pedestrian/vehicle volume roadways are more likely to have higher
risk than lower volume pedestrian/vehicle roadways. Pedestrian volumes may be quantified using indicators
such as number of pedestrian activations as a signalized intersection.
• Public input – Receiving and taking into consideration feedback from the public to better understand their
concerns is recommended. While formal complaints may not have been filed, areas of concern to the public
are more likely to have a higher risk if no improvements are made where an issue exists.
32

• Spatial distribution of facilities – Selecting facilities to be evaluated evenly across different areas of the
City might be more well-received by the public, assuming all the risk factors above are equal.
• Facility type – Selecting a variety of different facilities (e.g., public rights-of-way, buildings, parks) to be
evaluated during each phase, instead of all of the same facility type, may provide a better understanding of
different types of issues that may exist.
The City intends to review the ADA Transition Plan on an annual basis, particularly during the development of the
annual budget. The factors above will be considered by the City in the selection of projects with accessibility
improvements for implementation.
Technical Infeasibility
With respect to an alteration of a building or a facility, technical feasibility is something that has little likelihood of
being accomplished because existing structural conditions would require removing or altering a load-bearing member
that is an essential part of the structural frame; or because other existing physical or site constraints prohibit
modification or addition of elements, spaces, or features that are in full and strict compliance with the minimum
requirements. In alterations, where compliance with applicable requirements is technically infeasible, the alteration
shall comply with the requirements to the maximum extent feasible.
With respect to an alteration of a pedestrian facility in the public rights-of-way, where existing physical constraints
make compliance with applicable requirements technically infeasible, compliance with these requirements is required
to the maximum extent feasible. Existing physical constraints include, but are not limited to, underlying terrain,
underground structures, adjacent developed facilities, drainage, or the presence of a significant natural or historic
feature.
[Remainder of page intentionally left blank]
33

6.0 Conclusion and Next Steps
This document serves as the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Self-Evaluation and Transition Plan for the City of
Yuma.
Phase 1 was completed in 2023 and included the development of a facility inventory to determine the quantity of
facilities to be evaluated in future phases.
Phase 2 was completed in 2024 – 2025 and includes the Self-Evaluation of the following facilities:
o 9 buildings and associated parking lots/paths of travel (~50% of the buildings)
o 4 recreational facilities and associated parking lots/paths of travel (~50% of the recreational facilities)
o 19 parks and associated parking lots/paths of travel, park sidewalk and associated curb ramps (~50% of the
parks)
o 15 on-street accessible parking spaces
o 46 signalized intersections and associated curb ramps (~50% of the signalized intersections)
o 33 miles public rights-of-way arterial sidewalks and associated curb ramps and railroad crossings (~50% of
the arterial sidewalks)
The next steps for the City of Yuma are:
1. Complete evaluation remaining City facilities:
o 11 buildings and associated parking lots/paths of travel (~50% of the buildings)
o 6 recreational facilities and associated parking lots/paths of travel (~50% of the recreational
facilities)
o 17 parks and associated parking lots/paths of travel, park sidewalk and associated curb ramps
(~50% of the parks)
o 43 signalized intersections and associated curb ramps (~50% of the signalized intersections)
o 32 miles of public rights-of-way arterial sidewalks and associated curb ramps (~50% of the arterial
sidewalks)
o 46 miles of public rights-of-way collector sidewalks and associated curb ramps (100% of the
collector sidewalks)
o 544 miles of public rights-of-way local sidewalks and associated curb ramps (100% of the local
sidewalks)
Facility evaluations should include the following:
a. Facility reports with the compliance status of each element evaluated based on the applicable ADA
Standards that were applicable at the time of construction for buildings, recreational facilities, and parks
and PROWAG for pedestrian facilities in the public rights-of-way.
b. Assignment of barrier priority based on severity of non-compliance and DOJ priorities for buildings,
recreational facilities, and parks and severity of non-compliance and proximity to pedestrian
attractors for pedestrian facilities in the public rights-of-way.
c. Possible solutions to remove any barriers and bring the element into compliance.
d. Conceptual budget estimates of possible solutions.
e. Field work data in shapefile and geodatabase format.
34

2. Update the City’s ADA Transition Plan after each evaluation phase.
3. Continue to update the City’s ADA Transition Plan as projects are implemented and requests/grievances are
received.
4. Continue receiving public input on the ADA Self-Evaluation and Transition Plan.
5. Document the Self-Evaluation observations from the City’s review of current services, policies, practices,
programs, and activities, including modifications that have been made or will be made to bring these into
compliance, if needed.
[Remainder of page intentionally left blank]
35

Appendix
Appendix A: Public Outreach
Summary of Survey Responses
Web Map Summary
Appendix B: Facility Inventory Map
Appendix C: Evaluated Facility Maps
36

Appendix A: Public Outreach
Summary of Public Access Survey Responses
Table 16. Public Access Survey Question 1
Which of these City of Yuma buildings or recreational facilities do you visit regularly? (Choose all that apply.)
Answer Choice Percent of Number of
Responses Responses
Carver Pool - 1250 W. 5th Street 14.56% 15
City Hall - One City Plaza 41.75% 43
Engineering & Public Works Department - 155 W. 14th Street 7.77% 8
Prosecutors / Warehouse Surplus Auction - 190 W. 14th Street 5.83% 6
Classroom Fire Station #5 3.88% 4
Clymer Recreational Center - 553 S. Orange Avenue 4.85% 5
Boys & Girls Club - 1100 S 13th Avenue 8.74% 9
Historic Yuma Theatre - 254 S. Main Street 43.69% 45
Household Hazardous Waste - 1473 S. 2nd Avenue 2.91% 3
Joe Henry Optimist Center Harvest Preschool Childcare - 1793 S. 1st Avenue 7.77% 8
John Morris Cottage - 385 S. 13th Avenue 2.91% 3
Kennedy Pool - 890 E. 24th Street 17.48% 18
Marcus Pool - 5th Street & 5th Avenue 21.36% 22
Martin Luther King Jr Youth Career Center - 300 S. 13th Avenue 19.42% 20
North End Community Center - 160 E. 1st Street 10.68% 11
Riverside Outdoor Education Center - Riverside Park, 50 Prison Hill Road 6.80% 7
Thomas F. Allt Utilities Complex - 270 W. 13th Street 2.91% 3
Valley Aquatic Center - 4381 W. 18th Street 32.04% 33
Yuma Art Center - 254 S. Main Street 37.86% 39
Yuma Civic Center - 1440 W. Desert Hills Drive 53.40% 55
Yuma Municipal Court - 1515 S. 2nd Avenue 14.56% 15
Yuma Police Araby East Substation - 6390 E. 26th Street 2.91% 3
Yuma Police Department - 1500 S. 1st Avenue 13.59% 14
Yuma Readiness & Community Center - 6550 E. 24th Street 5.83% 6
37

Table 17. Public Access Survey Question 2
When using or participating in a City program, service, or activity, have you encountered any physical barriers or
obstructions in City-owned public buildings/recreational facilities?
Answer Choice Percent of Number of
Responses Responses
Yes 25.23% 27
No 57.94% 62
No, but someone I know has. 16.82% 18
Table 18. Public Access Survey Question 3
Have you encountered any communication barriers in a City of Yuma building/recreational facility or parking lot that
kept you from using or participating in a City program, service, or activity?
Answer Choice Percent of Number of
Responses Responses
Yes 21.10% 23
No 70.64% 77
No, but someone I know has. 8.26% 9
Table 19. Public Access Survey Question 4
Have you encountered any other accessibility-related challenges/concerns related to City of Yuma
buildings/recreational facilities or parking lots not covered by the questions above?
Answer Choice Percent of Number of
Responses Responses
Yes 25.71% 27
No 66.67% 70
No, but someone I know has. 7.62% 8
38

Table 20. Public Access Survey Question 5
Which of these City of Yuma parks do you visit regularly? (Choose all that apply.)
Answer Choice Percent of Number of
Responses Responses
Armed Forces Park - 281 Gila Street 15.12% 13
Bark Park - 1705 E. Palo Verde Street 15.12% 13
Barkley Ranch Park - 2750 S. 48th Drive 6.98% 6
Caballero Park / Friendship Park / North Caballero Park / Ray Kroc Sports 26.74% 23
Complex - West 34th Street
Carver Park - S. 13th Ave & W. 5th Street 18.60% 16
Centennial Athletic Complex - 2650 W. 20th Street 12.79% 11
Cibola Athletic Complex - 4100 20th Street 23.26% 20
Clymer Park - 533 S. Orange Avenue 5.81% 5
Desert Hills Golf Course - 1245 W. Desert Hills Drive 25.58% 22
Desert Hills Golf Course - Par 3 - 1301 W. 32nd Street 16.28% 14
Desert Ridge Park - 26th Place & Avenue 7 3/4 E 3.49% 3
Elena Orendain Curtis Athletic Complex - 2100 W. 28th Street 3.49% 3
Gateway Park - 1st Street & Gila 36.05% 31
Hacienda Park 1 - 24th Lane & 18th Avenue 4.65% 4
Hacienda Park 2 - 27th Drive & 18th Avenue 4.65% 4
Hacienda Park 3 - 28th Lane & 18th Avenue 4.65% 4
Hacienda Park 4 - 26th Street & 17th Avenue 4.65% 4
Heritage Library Park - 3rd Street & 3rd Avenue 17.44% 15
Joe Henry Athletic Complex / Joe Henry Memorial Park - 2310 W. Colorado Street 18.60% 16
Joe Henry Optimist Center Park - 1793 S. 1st Avenue 20.93% 18
Keegan Athletic Complex / Kennedy Athletic Complex / Kennedy Memorial Park - 18.60% 16
23rd Street & Kennedy Lane
Kiwanis Park - 8th Street & Magnolia Avenue 6.98% 6
Las Casitas Park - 31st Place & 28th Drive 4.65% 4
Marcus Park - 5th Street & 5th Avenue 10.47% 9
Netwest Park - 12th Street & 14th Avenue 3.49% 3
Ocotillo Park - 42nd Place & Jojoba Avenue 4.65% 4
Pacific Avenue Athletic Complex - 1700 E. 8th Street 34.88% 30
39

Parkway Place Park - 27th Street & 39th Drive 3.49% 3
Ponderosa Park - 26th Street & 29th Drive 5.81% 5
Riverside Park - Prison Hill Road & Giss Parkway 10.47% 9
Roxaboxen Park - 2nd Avenue & 8th Street 9.30% 8
Saguaro Neighborhood Park - 4183 Desert Willow Way 4.65% 4
Sanguinetti Memorial Park - 8th Avenue & 23rd Street 20.93% 18
Smucker Memorial Park - Avenue A & 28th Street 40.70% 35
Sunrise Optimist Park - 20th Street & 45th Avenue 11.63% 10
Terraces Park - 2601 E. View Parkway 4.65% 4
Victoria Meadows Park - 23rd Street & 20th Drive 4.65% 4
West Wetlands Park - 282 N. 12th Avenue 61.63% 53
Winsor Rotary Park - 20th Street & Avenue B 1/2 19.77% 17
Yuma Valley Park - 3162 W. 24th Street 18.60% 16
Table 21. Public Access Survey Question 6
When using or participating in a City program, service, or activity, have you encountered any physical barriers or
obstructions in City-owned public parks?
Answer Choice Percent of Number of
Responses Responses
Yes 28.26% 26
No 64.13% 59
No, but someone I know has. 7.61% 7
Table 22. Public Access Survey Question 7
Have you encountered any communication barriers in a City of Yuma park that kept you from using or participating in
a program, service, or activity?
Answer Choice Percent of Number of
Responses Responses
Yes 17.20% 16
No 78.49% 73
No, but someone I know has. 4.30% 4
40

Table 23. Public Access Survey Question 8
Have you encountered any other accessibility-related challenges/concerns related to City of Yuma parks not covered
by the questions above?
Answer Choice Percent of Number of
Responses Responses
Yes 18.89% 17
No 75.56% 68
No, but someone I know has. 5.56% 5
Table 24. Public Access Survey Question 9
Thinking only about City-owned, public rights-of-way in the City of Yuma, have you experienced any physical
barriers, inaccessible sections, or poor conditions along a pedestrian path (e.g., sidewalks, pedestrian street
crossings, pedestrian driveway crossings, curb ramps, etc.) you currently use or would like to use?
Answer Choice Percent of Number of
Responses Responses
Yes 44.19% 38
No 52.33% 45
No, but someone I know has. 3.49% 3
Table 25. Public Access Survey Question 10
When using sidewalks along the public rights-of-way within the City of Yuma, have you encountered locations without
curb ramps as you enter or exit a street or driveway crossing?
Answer Choice Percent of Number of
Responses Responses
Yes 34.88% 30
No 62.79% 54
No, but someone I know has. 2.33% 2
41

Table 26. Public Access Survey Question 11
Have you encountered difficulties crossing a street within the City of Yuma due to lack of pedestrian push buttons
and pedestrian signals?
Answer Choice Percent of Number of
Responses Responses
Yes 32.95% 29
No 65.91% 58
No, but someone I know has. 1.14% 1
Table 27. Public Access Survey Question 12
Have you encountered any other accessibility-related challenges/concerns related to the public rights-of-way within
the City of Yuma not covered by the questions above?
Answer Choice Percent of Number of
Responses Responses
Yes 22.35% 19
No 74.12% 63
No, but someone I know has. 3.53% 3
Table 28. Public Access Survey Question 13
Are there programs, services or activities sponsored by the City of Yuma that you would like to participate in or use
but have been unable to?
Answer Choice Percent of Number of
Responses Responses
Yes 27.59% 24
No 62.07% 54
No, but someone I know has. 10.34% 9
42

Table 29. Public Access Survey Question 14
Are there programs, services or activities sponsored by the City of Yuma that you have tried to participate in or use
but were unable to?
Answer Choice Percent of Number of
Responses Responses
Yes 21.43% 18
No 71.43% 60
No, but someone I know has. 7.14% 6
Table 30. Public Access Survey Question 15
Are you able to obtain available information from the City of Yuma website?
Answer Choice Percent of Number of
Responses Responses
Yes 82.35% 70
No 17.65% 15
Table 31. Public Access Survey Question 16
Are you able to obtain available information from the City of Yuma website?
Answer Choice Percent of Number of
Responses Responses
Yes 80.49% 66
No 19.51% 16
Table 32. Public Access Survey Question 17
Have you encountered any other accessibility-related challenges/concerns related to programs, services or activities
sponsored by the City of Yuma not covered by the question above?
Answer Choice Percent of Number of
Responses Responses
Yes 20.48% 17
No 75.90% 63
No, but someone I know has. 3.61% 3
43

Table 33. Public Access Survey Question 18
On a scale of 1 to 5, how would you rate the accessibility of the City of Yuma’s public amenities overall?
Answer Choice Percent of Number of
Responses Responses
One Star 10.39% 8
Two Stars 9.09% 7
Three Stars 37.66% 29
Four Stars 22.08% 17
Five Stars 20.78% 16
Table 34. Public Access Survey Question 19
On a scale of 1 to 5, how would you rate the accessibility of the City of Yuma’s programs, services, and activities
overall?
Answer Choice Percent of Number of
Responses Responses
One Star 10.96% 8
Two Stars 13.70% 10
Three Stars 26.03% 19
Four Stars 30.14% 22
Five Stars 19.18% 14
Table 35. Public Access Survey Question 20
Are you able to obtain available information from the City of Yuma website?
Answer Choice Percent of Number of
Responses Responses
Yes 62.82% 49
No 37.18% 29
44

Table 36. Public Access Survey Question 21
Do you have any general comments or items regarding accessibility that you would like the City to be aware of that
were not covered by the questions above?
Answer Choice Percent of Number of
Responses Responses
Yes 28.21% 22
No 71.79% 56
Table 37. Public Access Survey Question 22
(OPTIONAL) Which of the following describes you? (Click all options that apply to you and enter any relevant details
you would like to share)
Answer Choice Percent of Number of
Responses Responses
I’m a person with one or more disabilities 37.97% 30
I have a family member with one or more disabilities but I’m not their caregiver 32.91% 26
I am a caregiver for a person with one or more disabilities 18.99% 15
I have clients who have one or more disabilities 8.86% 7
I am a resident of the City of Yuma 74.68% 59
I live in the Yuma area, but reside outside the City limits of Yuma 13.92% 11
None of these choices describe me 0.00% 0
45

Web Map Summary
The City of Yuma received seven (7) comments indicating locations where improvements are desired on sidewalks,
buildings, and parks. The comment locations are shown in Figure 9. A detailed comment summary is provided in
Table 38.
Figure 9. Public Comment Location Map
46

Table 38. Web Map Public Comment Summary
ID Location Issue Type Comment
1 Yuma Territorial Prison Difficult Access - City Park Restroom ramp too steep.
State Historic Park
2 Intersection at West 28th Difficult Crossing Pedestrians cannot easily get across let
Street and South Avenue C alone handicapped persons.
Need HAWK signal at 8th Street and 6th
3 Intersection at West 8th Difficult Crossing Avenue so
Street and South 6th Avenue highschoolers and pedestrians can cross
8th Street.
4 West side of South Pacific Sidewalk Obstruction Missing sidewalks on Pacific Avenue.
Avenue
5 South side of West 32nd Sidewalk Obstruction Missing sidewalks on 32nd Street.
Street
6 East side of South Avenue A Sidewalk Obstruction Missing sidewalks on Avenue A.
7 West side of South Pacific Sidewalk Obstruction Missing sidewalks Pacific Avenue
Avenue connecting 32nd Street to the Walmart.
47

Appendix B: Facility Inventory Map
Figure 10. Facility Inventory Map
48

Appendix C: Evaluated Facility Maps
Figure 11. Evaluated Buildings Map
49

Figure 12. Evaluated Recreation Facilities Map
50

Figure 13. Evaluated Parks Map
51

Figure 14. Evaluated Signalized Intersections Map
52

Table 39. Evaluated Signalized Intersections
Signalized Intersection Signalized Intersection
Intersection of S 4th Ave and W 1st St Intersection of 32nd St and S Avenue A
Intersection of S 4th Ave and W 3rd St Intersection of 32nd St and S 8th Ave
Intersection of S 4th Ave and W 8th St Intersection of W 24th St and S Ave A
Intersection of E Harold C Giss Pkwy and S Rebondo Center Dr Intersection of 32nd St and S Arizona Ave
Intersection of W 16th St and S Avenue C Intersection of S 4th Ave and W 24th St
Intersection of W 16th St and S 31st Dr Intersection of S 4th Ave and W 28th St
Intersection of W 16th St and S Arizona Ave Intersection of S 4th Ave and W Catalina Dr
Intersection of W 16th St and S Redondo Center Dr Intersection of S 4th Ave and W 32nd St
Intersection of S 4th Ave and W 10th St Intersection of 32nd St and S Catalina Dr
Intersection of S 4th Ave and W 14th St Intersection of 32nd St and W 32nd St
Intersection of W 24th St and S 22nd Dr Intersection of 32nd St and S 4th Ave
Intersection of W 24th St and S 18th Ave Intersection of 32nd St and S 15th Ave
Intersection of W 16th St and S Avenue B Intersection of S Pacific Ave and E 24th St
Intersection of W 16th St and S 14th Ave Intersection of 32nd St and S Pacific Ave
Intersection of W 16th St and S Avenue A Intersection of 32nd St and N Frontage Rd
Intersection of S 4th Ave and W 16th St Intersection of S Pacific Ave and E 20th St
Intersection of W 16th St and S Yuma Palms Pkwy Intersection of S Pacific Ave and E Palo Verde St
Intersection of S Pacific Ave and E 16th St Intersection of S Avenue B and W 20th St
Intersection of S 4th Ave and W 22nd St Intersection of S Avenue B and W 24th St
Intersection of W 16th St and S 1st Ave Intersection of S Avenue B and W 26th St
Intersection of 32nd St and S 21st Dr Intersection of S Avenue B and W 28th St
Intersection of 32nd St and S Avenue B Intersection of 32nd St and E Main Canal Blk W
Intersection of Avenue A and W 24th St Intersection of 32nd St and midblock crossing (Lat. 32.7213; Long. -114.6203)
53

Figure 15. Public Rights-of-Way Sidewalk Corridors
54

Table 40. Evaluated Sidewalk Corridors
Project Name Limit 1 Limit 2
E Harold C Giss Pkwy S Rio Vista Dr S 4th Ave
S 4th Ave 100ft South of W Water St W 1st St
S 4th Ave W 1st St W 8th St
S 4th Ave W 8th St E 16th St
S 4th Ave W 16th St W 24th St
S 4th Ave W 24th St W 32nd St
S Pacific Ave E Burr St 300ft North of E 18th St
S Pacific Ave E 20th St 200ft South of SP Railroad
S Pacific Ave E 24th St E 32nd St
W 16th St S Pacific Ave US 8
W 16th St US 8 S 1st Ave
W 16th St S 1st Ave S Avenue A
W 16th St S Avenue A S Avenue B
W 16th St S Avenue B S Avenue C
W 16th St S Avenue C S 45th Ave
32nd St S Avenue 8 1/2 E 1600ft East of S Del Este Dr
32nd St 250ft East of Country Roads Blvd 250ft West of Country Roads Blvd
32nd St S Avenue 3 E S Pacific Ave
32nd St S Pacific Ave S Arizona Ave
32nd St S Arizona Ave S 4th Ave
32nd St S 4th St Main Canal
32nd St S 21st Dr S Avenue B
S Avenue B W 12th St W 16th St
S Avenue B W 16th St W 24th St
S Avenue B W 24th St W 32nd St
Main St 1st St Harold C Giss Pkwy
55