Tag Archives: barrier

Mickle Park Playground – How Useable?

Posted on by
Reply

As posted in June 2023. Amherstburg’s accessibility committee ENDORSED this playground, despite the barriers.

Below is an email to Councillor Pouget and Councillor McArthur on June 12 in advance of the council meeting.

After watching the June 5 Amherstburg Accessibility Advisory Committee Meeting, and reading some of the documents, I have some concerns regarding the recommendation to ENDORSE the playground design proposed for Warren Mickle Park’s playground redevelopment.

I’m writing to both of you because Councillor McArthur is council’s rep on the AAAC and Councillor Pouget consistently represents the interests of people with disabilities.

Ms. Heidi Baillargeon advised the AAAC an RFP resulted in three proposals that went through a Review and Scoring committee, and this was the design that was selected for installation at Warren Mickle Park. Ms. Baillargeon also advised the AAAC that it is partly a ramp structure, there are a number of accessible components, and that ‘a wheelchair can only go up to the first deck.’

It is preferable to use person first or identity first language and not refer to the assistive device alone.

How did a Review and Scoring committee approve this proposal?

What Makes a Playground Inaccessible? (aoda.ca)

  • Multilevel platforms
  • Stairs
  • Narrow walkways
  • Monkey bars
  • Bucket swings
  • Swings
  • Slides (plastic or metal)

Would someone please explain how the proposed Warren Mickle Park will be AODA compliant and inclusive if children with disabilities can’t access or use all the equipment? 

From the Parks Master Plan 2018, “It is essential that parks are inclusive and barrier-free, as guided by the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA). To ensure that the parks system is able to serve people from all segments of the community, accessible seating, washrooms, shade (structures and trees), parking, connections to key destinations and safety must be prominent considerations.”

While Ms. Baillargeon mentioned the CSA Z614:20, a safety standard, there was very little discussion regarding the AODA, Regulations, inclusive playground guidelines and mandatory public consultation.

The Integrated Accessibility Standards Regulation of the AODA mandates public consultation as follows:

“When constructing new or redeveloping existing outdoor play spaces, obligated organizations shall consult on the needs of children and caregivers with various disabilities” and shall do so in the following manner: 

1. designated public sector organizations and large organizations must consult with the public and persons with disabilities. (emphasis added).

2. Municipalities must also consult with their municipal accessibility advisory committees, where one has been established in accordance with subsection 29 (1) or (2) of the Act. 

Outdoor play spaces, accessibility in design 

80.20 When constructing new or redeveloping existing play spaces that they intend to maintain,obligated organizations shall,

(a) incorporate accessibility features, such as sensory and active play components, for children and caregivers with various disabilities into the design of outdoor play spaces; and

(b) ensure that outdoor play spaces have a ground surface that is firm, stable and has impact attenuating properties for injury prevention and sufficient clearance to provide children and caregivers with various disabilities the ability to move through, in and around the outdoor play space. O. Reg. 413/12, s. 6.

There was also no discussion regarding the 2021 survey that no children under the age of 18 participated in. 

Will the four benches be accessible? Will the bike racks be accessible? Will there be any braille elements? Will accessible washrooms be installed? Will accessible parking spaces be available? Will accessible signage and wayfinding be installed? The concept plan 2021 included a picnic area and in answer to the question, What park amenities would you like to see at Warren Mickle Park, 50 (74.6%) said picnic table: will accessible picnic tables be installed?

Also of concern is an AAAC member’s comments regarding the slide: he could only see one problem with it – that is you put it in this park and people find out about it, they’re gonna want it in all the other parks and that means retrofitting. Then the member asked about the cost for that.

In is my understanding that AAAC members identify barriers and ‘provide advice and recommendations to Council on accessibility issues within our community’ and council makes budgetary decisions for what accessible projects it prioritizes.

RECAP Accessibility Advisory Committee Meeting July 23, 2026

Posted on by
Reply

The committee didn’t accomplish much. The only agenda item, the 2026 Municipal Elections Accessibility Plan was just to receive for information – 51 one minutes and 39 seconds until adjournment.

Chair Shirley Curson Prue rarely reads the land acknowledgement but this time she did; she usually just hands everything over to staff.

Tony Pietrangelo, current committee member and councillor candidate provided two memorable moments:

1.Pietrangelo asked if they were having internet voting.

    Council voted to continue with the costliest, most labour intensive and least accessible in person voting on September 8, 2025. 

    Had it not been for my December 2022 delegation, council would have voted back then for in person voting.

    Pietrangelo was present at the October 23, 2025 accessibility committee meeting when admin advised it of council’s in person voting decision.

    Of course, the committee moved to endorse the 2026 Municipal Elections Accessibility Plan.

    Members still seem unsure of whether to make motions. Typically, the committee limits motions to receive minutes and adjourn but not to receive updates, direct admin to report back, or to take action.

    I did delegate to the committee in 2022 and offered suggestions for the committee to be strong advocates and follow procedural rules, but they disregarded my input as usual.

    2. The second memorable moment was when Pietrangelo enthusiastically praised the National AccessAbility Week flag raising. 

      It was a performative gesture. 

      If I were to describe this event to anyone not in attendance, I’d say a small crowd gathered, Prue read a speech, and a staff member raised a flag – that’s it. 

      small crowd gathered for National AccessAbility Week flag raising at Amherstburg park in 2026.


      This minimal effort is typical of communities that lack a strong commitment to inclusion and accessibility.

      “It’s now part of our standard practices,” advised admin.

      It’s a low standard.

      The town wants to know about voting barriers – at least that’s what the committee was advised. But my input on voting barriers has been disregarded for a few elections by both council and the accessibility committee.

      Councillor Pouget’s motion on December 12, 2024 was that my submission regarding voting barriers be sent to the committee. Of course, the committee didn’t discuss my submission any more than it discussed my previous submissions or my delegations about barriers.

      The town wants more people to vote – at least that’s also what the committee was advised. But staff recommended, and council approved, the most inaccessible traditional in person voting which may limit voter turnout. 

      No one should be surprised that barriers can repress voter turnout and influence feelings of efficacy for voters with disabilities (Schur et al., Reference Schur, Ameri and Adya2017).

      Admin should have recommended a greater variety of voting methods to meet the needs of a variety of voters to increase voter turnout. It’s counterproductive to limit choices and then complain of limited results.

      Of course, council should have directed admin to report on the costs of each voting method in December 2022. 

      Very briefly, the committee mentioned a library audit.

      The library was to have been audited in January 2024. 

      An inoperable push button at the hub, future sidewalk repairs, and pickleball parking were noted.

      Almost an hour for business that could have been addressed probably within 15 minutes.

      Meeting adjourned.

      RECAP Accessibility Committee Meeting February 26, 2026

      Posted on by

      My defamation lawsuit against the town clerk and town of Amherstburg followed my January 2022 critique of the draft multi-year accessibility plan.

      Some of my answers to the multi-year accessibility plan survey questions that I completed in January 2026 are missing from the documents and verbal report on the survey findings.

      Memorable Meanderings:

      Shirley Prue said she’s intrigued about the federal standards; “took only 20 years but there you go.”

      (As I keep pointing out, Mayor Prue stood up in the provincial legislature just over 20 years ago to vote in favour of the AODA. In 2025, he said this town has not been compliant). 

      Tony Pietrangelo asked, “where are the definitions as to what a public space is and a private space is? Where is that definition? Is there a standard that’s put out by the Government of Ontario?”

      (The Design of Public Spaces Standards under the AODA were enacted on January 1, 2013). 

      Centennial Park redevelopment

      Council already approved option 1 at its February 23 meeting so Heidi Baillargeon presented a recap on zoom:

      • consultations with the tennis club, sports organizations, and North Star High School. (no mention of mandatory consultation with people with disabilities).
      • two dedicated tennis courts and two basketball courts, with one set of tennis courts fully fenced and the other non-fenced.
      • A multi-use trail, accessible parking spaces, and tree planting are also part of the design, with a focus on maintaining Russell Renaud Hill.
      • The design includes rest stations every 100 meters, with some as close as 50 meters apart, and connections to accessible parking spots near the tennis and basketball courts.

      Baillargeon mentioned the intention is to start the build in the winter for a spring completion.

      Tony Pietrangelo gave Baillargeon his blessings and asked if the parking lot would be paved. Baillargeon explained only the accessible parking spaces would be paved – the rest will remain gravel.

      (So, a million dollars for courts and yet another walking trail but people with disabilities will still encounter barriers trying to navigate through a parking lot. Priorities).

      Pietrangelo asked what was budgeted for the project. Councillor Donald McArthur said it was just over a million.

      Chris Drew said, I think you guys did a fantastic job. He mentioned some criticism about the trail system, but he thought the people in the area need that. He said a lot of them don’t have any way to get out to the Libro and they don’t have a way to get to the green away trails. 

      (The criticism I saw was related to the fact that over a million dollars is being spent on another amenity like a walking trail while infrastructure is crumbling, there are sidewalks to walk on, and sidewalks and roads are in desperate need of repair).

      Baillargeon provided more details. The trail length is around 800 meters in total, 2.4 metres wide. Bench station spacing is an average maximum of 100 but the average spacing in this design here is around 75. We have 10 benches in total around the trail, with a cross slope is 2% on the trail. So that’s 2.5 inches in 10 feet. The parking spaces: four type A parking spaces 3.4 metres wide for a van, ten Type B parking spaces 2.4 metres wide for a car with a 1.5 metre wide shared aisle between the spaces.

      Prue said we always think about, how do we get onto the trail if we’re in a chair.

      (Maybe Prue should spend more time thinking about all the barriers in town that prevent people with disabilities from equally participating. Mayor Prue, her husband, did say in 2025 this town has not been compliant. That’s right – the town failed to meet the January 1, 2025 AODA deadline).

      Accessible On-Street Parking Space

      Prue said okay, 7.2 accessible on street parking space. What’s that one about?

      (The agenda description is an aerial of Briar Ridge. The committee discussed this at the January 22 meeting: create an accessible on-street parking space at Briar Ridge Park, for approximately $500 for paint and signage and conduct public consultations for on street parking. This was to be one of the highlighted projects during National AccessAbility Week).

      The committee was advised that the traffic by-law would need to be amended to have parking only on one side.

      There seemed to be some confusion about where people would park and if they would be exiting their vehicle onto grass.

      Multi-Year Accessibility Draft Plan and Survey Results

      Prue said, okay, moving on to 7.3, which is the multi-year Accessibility Plan, draft. What you got?

      (Just like her husband, she hands items over to staff. The meetings are for members to discuss items; staff should only be called on for clarification).

      Admin said at a high level, the survey was successful in promoting some discourse in the community. 

      (I wonder how success was measured. I saw percentages, one document with pie charts and another document with bar graphs. It was later revealed that 17 people participated. Given the approximate 6400 Amherstburg residents with disabilities, that’s a poor result in my opinion).

      Admin continued – if results indicate there’s some dissatisfaction there may be further need to refine and focus on those areas to understand what those concerns are. 

      (There was plenty of time to refine questions because the multi-year plan wasn’t due until December 2026).

      Admin said responses were received from a variety of individuals, including people with disabilities and caregivers, although no breakdown was given.

      (There should’ve been a breakdown given because the question was, ‘Do you wish to identify as… a person with a disability. The percentages indicate eight people identified as a person with a disability).

      Admin then reviewed the survey questions and answers. 

      (Not all the answers; I noticed some of mine were missing).

      Do the Town parks, including multi-use paths and trails, playground structures, and other amenities, meet your accessibility needs?

      Admin said generally, they seem to be meeting the need for a vast majority of the respondents (11 people) but 25% (4 people) said no. 

      Admin said now that they know, they can use that to guide some of the focus of further inquiry on the plan. 

      (The questions should’ve been more comprehensive now. Again, there was plenty of time to refine questions because the multi-year plan wasn’t due until December 2026).

      Have you encountered barriers at any Town parks, trails, or amenities?

      38% (7 people) said yes.

      One survey document does not list the barriers.

      Another survey document lists top barriers:  

      • Parking
      • Pathways
      • Rest areas

      Admin echoed the barriers that were identified were parking, pathways and rest areas. And, since the committee just discussed those items in Centennial Park, the conclusion was, ‘it seems like the committee is focused on the right things in that regard. And what we’re hearing from the respondent survey is that that’s where the attention should lie.’ 

      (Should the focus really be based on seven responses?).

      Does town recreation programming meet your accessible needs?

      Once again, admin said that’s where more refined questions around what sort of programming is missing out. Admin mentioned sledge hockey and the Miracle League.

      Do the town sidewalks meet your accessibility needs?

      About 24% (4 people) said no. Reasons: the age and design of the infrastructure or maintenance standards. 

      Do the transportation options available in Town meet your accessibility needs?

      The question about what would enhance the accessibility of transportation options within the Town wasn’t reported on or included in the reports. Again, admin mentioned further future questions to find out more.

      A couple of questions about customer service: 12% (2 people) used the accessible customer service kiosk in the past year; of those that use them, 100% (2 people) said that they did meet their accessible needs. Admin said that’s a significant finding, it indicates that the kiosks are currently meeting the need. 

      (The kiosks are currently meeting the need of two people; that’s not a significant finding or indication that it’s accessible to the disability community).

      How do you access information shared by the Town?

      76% (13 people) use the town website, 76% (13 people) use the town social media, and 53% (9 people) word of mouth. 

      Pietrangelo asked how many people took the survey.

      Admin said 130 people interacted with the talk the burg site, 61 accessed the areas that have the survey, only 17 of them completed the survey.

      Pietrangelo emphasized the difference between percentages and real numbers. He wondered why they don’t get more people participating, especially under 18 years old. 

      Admin said if a barrier affects one person, they have that same standard to meet it. 

      (But the number one complaint in the residents’ OpenAir survey is accessibility and nno meaningful action was taken).

      Pietrangelo asked who designed the questions and was told the communications team.

      Drew said one thing that bothers him is these open houses are made available, surveys are made available, and people sit at home and don’t bother to do anything, but then they come out of the woodwork later with all kinds of stuff, like the Centennial Park. People are coming out saying, oh, they should be putting a swimming pool in, they should be doing putting a splash pad in, they should be doing this, they should be doing that; they don’t need the walking trails and stuff like that. Where were they when we had these open houses and the surveys for them?

      (Drew also complained on my facebook page, saying most people are too lazy or don’t care).

      Instead of blaming or shaming, the committee should’ve reviewed where the survey was advertised, how many times, and asked if there were any barriers to participation. I did point out to admin that if surveys can be emailed out, they should be able to email them back instead of having to take them in person to the town hall).

      Prue asked if there were any other questions. 

      (It would be so refreshing to have decorum at meetings).

      Projects and Initiatives in the Accessibility Plan

      • Admin outlined the projects and initiatives in the multi-year accessibility plan, drawn from existing documents: the town’s seven-year capital projects, transportation master plan, and parks master plan.
      • The plan will be open for public feedback and will be revised based on the committee’s input and the survey results.

      Admin mentioned the federal standards. Prue said she’s intrigued; took only 20 years but there you go.

      (As I keep pointing out, Mayor Prue stood up in the provincial legislature 20 years ago to vote in favour of the AODA. In 2025, he said this town has not been compliant). 

      Unfinished Business and New Business

      • Admin provided updates on unfinished business, including the funding for accessible parking spaces at the Libro and Briar Ridge.
      • The committee discussed the donation of a temporary accessible ramp to the Co-An Park Board for use at their stage.
      • The motion to donate the ramp passed, and the committee agreed to review the multi-year accessibility plan and provide feedback at the next meeting.
      • Meeting adjourned.

      Put Away Your Shovels

      Posted on by

      Since 2017, the town of Amherstburg is responsible for clearing and salting all 58 km of municipal sidewalks and trails.

      There was some confusion and/or misinformation about sidewalk snow removal in response to my Slushy Sidewalk Barriers post and Facebook post about another dangerous icy sidewalk.

      Image description: ice and snow covered municipal sidewalk posing a barrier to people with disabilities.

      The town’s website states: Snow Removal on Sidewalks – “At the December 11, 2017 Council meeting Council approved a Town wide sidewalk snow removal program. By-law 2005-04 regulating residents performing sidewalk snow removal WAS REPEALED by Town Council and no longer in effect.”

       “Please be aware that all municipal sidewalks will now be cleared of snow and ice by Town Staff.” – Town of Amherstburg

      The town site lists  519-736-3664 as the Infrastructure Services Department number to call for a problem between 8 am and 4 pm.

      The emergency after hours number is 519-561-6365.

      The Supreme Court of Canada, in Nelson (City) v. Marchi, 2021 SCC 41, ruled municipalities can be held liable for injuries caused by its snow clearing decision.

      Ms. Marchi was injured when she crossed a snowbank to access a municipal sidewalk.

      The judges said the city owed her a “duty of care.”