| 
| 
| 
Beach Access Study Results: Surfaces |
||
|
The authors gratefully acknowledge the many people who contributed to this project: volunteer subjects of Indiana and Florida, product manufacturers, Dr. Diane Richardson and Judith Sims of the Dade County Park and Recreation Department, Teri Cleavinger of the National Center on Accessibility, and Michelle Christian for her many hours of editing the manuscript. Requests for copies of this report should be directed to: National Center on Accessibility (812) 856-4422 (Voice)
SURFACES FACTOR ANALYSIS
Beachrings The Beachrings are 1-foot square interlocking plastic tiles. The Beachrings
derive their name from the ring constructed under each tile, which
digs into the sand to prevent slipping. The Beachrings are 1/4 inch
thick and snap together to form any size surface needed. The light
weight of the Beachrings also make it easy to move.
As with all of the surfaces, the Beachrings scored relatively high on the Appearance Factor, although there was greater variability in the Beachring ratings than for other surfaces (Table 8). The variability may have been due to the mixed reactions to the color of the Beachrings. There were those who appreciated the bright blue color, as it made locating the surface on the sand much easier. Others felt the color was 'too conspicuous," looked too 'artificial,' and 'drew attention to this as a path for people who needed special assistance. Function The Beachring tiles were thin, which created a pliable surface that conformed to the contour of the sand. Many of the users appreciated the movement in the surface, as it gave the "feel' of being on sand. For a number of other users, however, conforming to the contours of the sand made it more difficult to push on the Beachrings. Also, wheelchair users reported loss of traction when the surface was wet or had sand on it. Safety There were two safety concerns expressed by users of the Beachrings: the surface edges and the traction. Several users mentioned that the edges of the Beachrings were potentially dangerous. The edges were not beveled and could scrape someone's foot, especially at the corner or each tile. Also, if the tiles were to become disconnected, which did occur during testing, the uneven surface might cause problems for those using canes or crutches. The second safety concern was related to traction. Several users commented that they lost traction when the tiles became wet or sandy, an obvious likelihood when used at beaches. Conforming to the contour of the sand increased the probability of slopes where traction would be important. Mountain Grout Mountain Grout is a soil stabilizer. Sprayed onto or mixed into the sand, Mountain Grout binds with the sand to form a hardened surface within hours. Initially, the surface darkens after Mountain Grout is applied, however, the contrast with the untreated sand lessens with time.
The Mountain Grout received scores for appearance comparable to those of the other surfaces tested. Users' comments on the appearance of the Mountain Grout were generally very favorable. Many of the users commented on the "natural look' of the Mountain Grout. A few users commented on the difficulty in distinguishing the hardened surface from the untreated sand, thus making it difficult to locate. Function The Mountain Grout received relatively high ratings for function (Table 8). It provided a hard surface that was "easy to push on', as evidenced by its high scores on questions regarding the ease with which users could control and push their wheelchairs on the surface in both dry and wet conditions (Table 9). Safety Concern was expressed regarding the safety of the Mountain Grout for those who would walk on the surface and for those with visual impairments. Some users felt the texture of the surface was rough and provided a 'sharp edge' when the sand eroded from the hardened surface. At least one user raised concern for people with low vision using the surface because of the lack of contrast between the sand and the hardened surface. Snow Fence Snow Fence is a thin, plastic coated mesh that is placed upon the surface of the sand. It can be purchased in either green or yellow.
The Snow Fence received relatively high scores on appearance (Table 8). The "low-tech" look (what one user called the "chicken wire" look) of the Snow Fence was attractive to many of the users. The green Snow Fence provided color contrast with the sand, however, the yellow Snow Fence was more difficult to detect. Function The Snow Fence received the lowest rating for function among the surfaces tested (Table 8). Although it provided better traction than sand, the fact that it conformed to the contour of the sand made it difficult to use for some. Also, it would often "bunch up' under the front casters of wheelchairs. This could be easily overcome with a manual chair by popping the front wheels over the gathered surface. With electric wheelchairs, however, it was much more difficult to become untangled. Safety The fact that the Snow Fence was not raised above the surface of the sand relieved some users of their concern for falling off the side. The tendency of the Snow Fence to bunch under the front casters of wheelchairs was mentioned as a safety concern by many of the users. Superdeck Superdeck modular walk and deck panels are made of polyethylene with ultra-violet light inhibitors. The panels are connected using stainless steel hardware. Each panel is 66 by 42 inches, and is 3 1/6 inches thick. It can be purchased in either white or tan. For this test, the Superdeck was installed so that the top of the surface was flush with the sand.
The Superdeck received the highest rating for each of the factors, including appearance (Table 8). Both the look of the Superdeck and its color were appreciated by users. Function The Superdeck provided a very firm and hard surface. As the surface was imbedded in the sand, the slope could be altered slightly during installation. The surface also seemed to function well when wet (Table 9.) Safety The most often mentioned safety issue related to the width of the surface. As with the other surfaces, users desired as wide a surface as possible. For this test, a 42-inch wide section of Superdeck was used. Sand could easily erode away from the sides of the Superdeck causing a sharp drop-off. The Superdeck also has the potential for causing tripping or stubbing of toes for those walking perpendicular to the run of the surface. The light colors blend in with the sand, which may make it difficult to detect the surface. RECOMMENDATIONS Accessible surfaces seem to provide the greatest opportunities for access to beaches by people with mobility impairments. A properly installed and maintained surface allows all users to have access to and across the sand and to the water. An accessible surface may be the only way to provide access to those wheelchair users who have difficulty transferring from their own chair to an assistive device, or to those who cannot easily adapt to a standard assistive device. As assistive devices require greater staff attention for management than do surfaces, the latter would seem to provide access at all times rather than just peak use times.
Though each of the assistive devices provides greater opportunity for access to beaches and water, none is designed to be used independently. This situation has resulted for two primary reasons:
2) the liability concerns of manufacturers related to providing a device that might be used independently in the water.
The cost of many of the devices seemed prohibitive for many potential users. There is a tendency for any type of assistive devices for people with disabilities to be expensive. This may be due to the size of the market, the cost of the manufacturing, insurance costs, or the common reimbursement by a third party insurer for "medical equipment." Regardless of the cause, the fact remains that many users and many agencies will have limited ability to purchase such a device.
Back to top |
