Detectable Warning Surfaces
I am strongly in favor of providing detectable warning at all intersections.
Tom Heinl
David Eichenauer, July 1, 2002
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the above referenced document.
1103.3 Minimum Clear Width - we feel strongly that this should be 60" rather than 48".
110L3.2 Detectable Warnings. There should be detectable warnings at all curb cuts and blended transitions.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment.
Sincerely,
David Eichenauer
Frank Synoground, October 24, 2002
I would like to offer the following comments on the draft regulations and thank the committee for its considerable efforts. I am blind and am particularly interested in tactile warnings.
Detectable Warnings (1104.3.2)
Detectable warnings should only be required where the ramp slope was 1:15
In reference to sections as cited below:
1108.1 General.
Detectable warnings shall consist of a surface of truncated domes aligned in a square grid pattern and shall comply with 1108.
1108.1.1 Dome Size.
Truncated domes in a detectable warning surface shall have a base diameter of 0.9 inches
The above listed specifications would seem to eliminate or at least not acknowledge parallel tactile warnings that would act as wayfinding as well as warning. I am blind and consider wayfinding in some cases an important safety issue as well.
Frank Synoground
Portland, OR
Joseph Roeder, September 13, 2002
As a working, tax-paying citizen who is blind, I am writing to express my support for the PROWAC report and the call for detectable warnings. I am a member of the traveling public and my personal sense of safety in enhanced by detectable warning strips and other alerts about hazardous traffic areas.
Some may argue that detectable warnings produce negative stereotypes about people who are blind or that such warnings are not necessary for well-trained cane travelers who pay attention. But people who are blind, like all human beings, can have their attention distracted from time to time.
Once I stepped off an elevator and started walking to the edge of a train platform. I had traveled this route dozens of times and knew the platform was about 10 paces to the right. But that day my attention was distracted by my thoughts and I forgot which side of the platform I was on. The other side is farther from the elevator and I was walking briskly as though I has several more steps to take. My cane encountered the detectable warning strip and I suddenly forgot my thoughts and immediately stopped. With the long strides I was taking I would have gone over the edge in another step or 2. I considered what I was doing, realized my lack of attentiveness and gave heart-felt thanks for that detectable warning strip.
Pedestrian safety should be the primary concern, not worries over the opinions others have about people who are blind. Detectable warnings are no different than the traffic signs that warn motorists about speed bumps, steep grades, railroad crossings or other highway hazards. Would anyone prudently argue that these signs are not needed because the motorist should be paying attention? Of course not!
I urge the Access Board to support detectable warnings and any other appropriate measures that enhance safety for the traveling public.
Sincerely,
Joseph Roeder
I strongly believe in detectable warning and accessible pedestrian signs. Any opportunity for safe warning is an opportunity for life itself!!!
Lee Brown
Virginia Parezo, October 20, 2002
I travel greatly, this would be at my advantage to have the pedestrian signals and detectable warnings. Please do what you can to support this forum. Thank-you!
Virginia Parezo
Rob Turner, September 13, 2002
I'm sending you this e-mail in support of detectable warning strips. As a totally blind traveler, I find them to be very helpful and several times their presents have warned me that I was dangerously close to the edge of subway platforms or railroad tracks. we need to have detectable warnings at places where vehicular traffic is likely to be found and we need accessible pedestrian signals.
Thanks for your attention.
sincerely
Rob Turner
Christopher Wright, September 8, 2002
I proudly support the Prowac report. We need to have detectable warnings at places where vehicular traffic is likely to be found and we need accessible pedestrian signals. One place where these should be used is at Subway stations. If these detectable warnings are placed near the train tracks, a blind person would know that he or she is approaching the edge of the platform.
Please respond as soon as possible. Thanks.
Christopher Wright
Julie K. Blamphin, October 28, 2002
I support audible traffic signals & detectable warnings.
Thank you.
Julie
Julie K. Blamphin
Data Solutions & Technology, Inc.
Karyn Campbell, September 18, 2002
I would like to speak in support of the Public Rights of Way Accessibility Committee (PROWAC) report on detectable warnings and accessible pedestrian signals (APS. Both of these devices are important to the safe travel of people who are blind or visually impaired. I will discuss each device separately.
First of all, I would like to give you some background on me. I am blind but have some light perception. I have never had perfect vision and lost a good deal of what I once had later in life. I also have a mild to moderate hearing loss for which I wear hearing aids bilaterally.
Detectable warnings are important because they provide me with clues about my environment. In a railroad station, a detectable warning is my yellow line. I know when I am at the edge and should not go any further. I must still use good mobility skills when I am traveling. People's skill level does vary; but a person must use the skills he has.
I said that these warnings provide me useful clues about my environment. when I am walking on a train platform, I have more confidence if there is a detectable warning than I do if there is not a detectable warning. This is important to me, especially when you consider that train stations are noisy and background moise makes it more difficult for me to know what is going onnn because sounds can and are drowned out by engine noise. Last Saturday Septemmber 14, 2002, I was waiting for a commuter train at the Glen Ellyn station. Afreight train came through just as I was arriving on the platform. I became disoriented and was not sure which way I was facing. After the train left, I used the detectable warning along the track and in front of the station door to determine where I was. As a result of doing this, i regained my orientation and was fine from there.
As for Accessible Pedestrian Signals (APS), they are good at intersections which are extremely dangerous to cross. We have at least one intersection like this in my community. There is a lot of traffic at this intersection. This intersection does need an APS. I have never crossed this intersection on my own and nevner will. APS not only help people who are blind or visually impaired, they help senior citezens, school -age children, and others with disabilities. They give all of these people extra assurance that they will make it across safely when using good sound judgement and proper safety and mobility sills. Vibrotactile technology can hellp some who are deaf-blind make it as well. Please keep in mind that the term "deaf-blind" does not just refer to a complete loss of both senses; but also refers to a combination of a complete loss of vision and partial loss of hearing or vice versa. While I do not know how much these signals will help me due to background noise, I know they will help others stay safe when crossing at dangerous intersections. These intersections must be determined by the community with input from its residents.
It is time for us to have equal access to our environment. We deserve the same information that the sighted world gets. A detectable warning is our yellow line; and an APS gives us information in a nonvisual form which the sighted world receives in a visual form. It is our safety and access to the comunity we are talking about here.
Thank you very much for your time, attention, and strong support for detectable warnings and APS. Our safety does matter. I will be watching this issue very closely to make sure that my safety, as well as the safety of those close to me, is protected.
Sincerely,
Karyn Campbell
Alpidio Rolón, October 22, 2002
Please include the attached letter among the comments on the proposed guidelines about "audible traffic signals" and "detectable warnings".
Alpidio Rolón
President
NFB of Puerto Rico
National Federation of the Blind of Puerto Rico
I write because I wish to express my views about the proposed guidelines regarding "audible traffic signals" and "detectable warnings". Let me first of all state, that I have been totally blind for thirty-two years. I have up to now, thanks to good orientation and mobility training, managed to go anywhere I wish using my other senses. My few encounters with ATS's have been to say the least, disagreeable. Not only have they not helped; they have impeded my ability to concentrate on ambient signals that might better enable me to cross a street safely. Their use could only be contemplated in certain situations, such as crossings that contemplate multiple traffic alternatives. Even then, we would be better off with "vibrotactile signals".
On the other hand, the imposition of "detectable warnings" at all curb ramps greater than 1-15, is unnecessary and costly. Any blind person can easily detect said ramp. It seems to me that you should concentrate more on the inclination of the curb ramp than on requiring "detectable warnings". Better yet, even though it is not your area of concern, more money should be spent on providing more and better training for blind people.
Hoping that you will consider my opinion about "audible traffic signals" and "detectable warnings", I am,
Sincerely,
Alpidio Rolón
President
NFB of Puerto Rico
Judy Manlove, October 28, 2002
The Audible Pedestrian Signal? A national policy mandating installation? Show cause why. Until then, understand that there are those who want to be patronized and those who do not. To patronize costs lots of our money.
I am Judy Manlove, [ ...] and this is forwarded to you with permission.
Sincerely,
Judy Manlove
It is my understanding that detectable warnings are now to be placed in pedestrian crosswalks. In my city? Who says they are needed for the blind or anyone else? Such assertion is a blatant lie. Besides, where is your data showing need?
I am Judy Manlove, [ ... ] giving permission for my comment to be forwarded in this way. Please stop detectable warnings.
Sincerely,
Judy Manlove
Sherry Gomes, October 15, 2002
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposals concerning audible traffic signals and detectable warnings. I am blind, and I am a competent traveler, either with a white cane or with my Guide Dog. I do not believe that every intersection needs to have an audible traffic signal. I am completely able to cross streets, whether they be lightly traveled or extremely busy. I find the added noise caused by the audible signals add confusion in a situation where the traffic is heavy and constant.
I am even more opposed to detectable warnings. I was born with Juvenile Rheumatoid Arthritis. my right knee is fused, and I have joint replacements in my left knee and both hips. Sometimes, the slightest change in the elevation or texture of a sidewalk or road can cause me to stumble or lose my balance and fall. Those who want detectable warnings to help them stop for edges, platforms or to cross a street are not considering the needs of people in wheel chairs or who have difficulty walking. If a blind person uses the white cane or a dog guide properly, there should be no need for these detectable warnings.
Thank you very much.
Sincerely,
Sherry Gomes
Instructor, Seattle Lighthouse Education and Training
Hello; I am extremely concerned about the proposed guidelines which will, as I understand it, require audible traffic signals and detectable warning bumps at all intersections. These are NOT needed.
While there are a few cases where an audible signal may be helpful - an especially complex intersection, and detectable warning bumps may be useful - where the sidewalk and street are the same level; these situations are few and far between.
The current crop of audible signals are a particularly bad choice since almost all of them beep or whistle rather than providing usable information. Requiring them to talk rather than beep or whistle would be extremely helpful. Hearing "Walk east and west", and "Don't walk north and south", is far more helpful than "beep, beep, beep, beep".
Detectable warning bumps are not needed in most places. The only time they serve any useful purpose is when the street and sidewalk are level with each other. The presence of these bumps does not make it safer for blind people, in fact these bumps give a false sense of security because they don't tell you how far down the street is from the sidewalk, or in my case how far down the track was from the platform.
I saw the warning bumps and said "So, I know that's the edge of the platform." I then stepped down to go to my train which was several tracks over and fell. If I'd been using my white cane I would have known there was a huge drop rather than the small one I thought there was.
Detectable warning bumps give a false sense of security, as for that matter do audible traffic signals; therefore they need to be kept to an absolute minimum.
I encourage you to reconsider the guidelines and not believe the "poor pitiful blind" idea that so many people are using to justify these unnecessary warning systems. Rather than spending millions of dollars on audible signals and detectable warning bumps we would be far better served by spending thousands of dollars on GOOD mobility training for blind pedestrians.
Thank you for your time and for reading my letter.
Eric Foss
Paul Dressell, October 18, 2002
My wife, Bernadette, and I are totally blind and have been traveling independently wit the use of white canes for over 40 years without detectable warnings. Although we reside in Cincinnati, Ohio, we have traveled in many large cities such as Atlanta, Chicago, Toronto, and New York City. With a 70% unemployment rate, it is important for those who are blind to live in the world as it exists. The instances when detectable warnings would be beneficial are very small. With the state of the economy, I should think that any reason for not spending money would come as welcome news. With adequate mobility training, pedestrians who are blind can navigate most thoroughfares; any installation of detectable warnings should be done in consultation with residents who are blind and live in the areas under consideration for such devices.
Sincerely,
Paul Dressell
Christine McGroarty, September 9, 2002
I'm sending a quick note to say how completely puzzled I am at the resistance to detectable warnings. I'm sure you have received much impassioned correspondence on this matter, so I will simply pose the question. Generally aren't there color coded warning signals in the same places where the detectable signals are proposed? If warnings, in the forms of color, are deemed necessary and appropriate why would you not provide tactile warnings as well?
In addition to the logic of the matter, there seems to me to be a significant risk for legal action if visual warnings are present and tactile ones are I remain puzzled by such vehement resistance to such an obvious and harmless requirement.
Christine McGroarty
Senior Budget and Management Analyst
Office of Budget and Management
City and County of Denver
Strongly recommend specifically addressing the smoothness or flatness of surfaces for crosswalks. This may already be adequately addressed in sidewalk guidelines, but if not, then I make the same comment for all pedestrian surfaces.
Recently, City of Seattle installed some cobblestone-like surfaces for crosswalks in a number of locations. Technically, the surface is achieved via concrete-stamping, but the result is the same as if bricks were laid ... UNEVEN bricks laid. Each "brick" has an uneven surface, each "brick" is different from "bricks" next to it, so the resultant surface is quite bumpy. You can hear it when you drive over it in a vehicle.
In my view and the view of others who are aware of accessibility issues, this surface is unacceptable due to its notably uneven surface and the problems it may pose to those who use wheelchairs, walkers, canes, or crutches, or who simply have difficulty with balance.
It is my understanding that local jurisdictions who use this type of surface are trying to achieve a certain "historic" or "stylized" look to the crosswalk. I have heard discussion of allowing such surfaces to be used, but also requiring that a middle pathway that is smooth and flat to be included within the crosswalk (min. 44"). With the smooth path in the middle, you have:
1. provided an accessible surface to those who need it,
2. allowed the local jurisdiction to use a surface to achieve a certain aesthetic, and
3. with the edges of the crosswalk being textured, you have provided a version of detectable warnings to those who are blind or have low vision to more safely cross.
Thank you for your consideration.
Karen Ozmun, Disability Compliance Specialist
King County Office of Civil Rights
Reference: Audible Traffic Signals and Detectable Warnings.
COMMENTS:
· Most intersections do not require an ATS for the accessibility and safety of blind pedestrians.
· Only those intersections with complex geometry, complex signalization, or varied signalization for each lane may be appropriate for an ATS.
· Vibrotactile indicators should be used in preference to audible signals in order to minimize noise distractions and better promote safety.
· Locator tones should not be included in the final guidelines and may be subject to further research.
Detectable Warnings
· At most intersections the built environment provides ample accessible cues to determine the difference between the sidewalk and the street.
· A slope of less than 1:15
I urge the Access Board to reconsider the recommendations made in the recent draft guidelines.
Respectfully,
Mary Cogg
Larry J. Ghrigsby, October 23, 2002
Reference: Audible Traffic Signals and Detectable Warnings.
COMMENTS:
· Most intersections do not require an ATS for the accessibility and safety of blind pedestrians.
· Only those intersections with complex geometry, complex signalization, or varied signalization for each lane may be appropriate for an ATS.
· Vibrotactile indicators should be used in preference to audible signals in order to minimize noise distractions and better promote safety.
· Locator tones should not be included in the final guidelines and may be subject to further research.
Detectable Warnings
· At most intersections the built environment provides ample accessible cues to determine the difference between the sidewalk and the street.
· A slope of less than 1:15
I urge the Access Board to reconsider the recommendations made in the recent draft guidelines.
Respectfully,
Larry J. Ghrigsby
Andrea Giudice, October 27, 2002
My name is Andrea Giudice. I am blind and want to let you know that I give my exuberant and total support to the existence and increase of Accessible
Pedestrian Signals and Detectable Warnings at intersections. I live in
the grater San Francisco Bay area and travel throughout the country. I can give you enumerable examples of how crucial Accessible Pedestrian Signals and Detectable Warnings are at intersections.
I have heard nothing about discontinuing the incorporating of crossing indicators for pedestrians who do not need accommodation in terms of size or contrast of signage or other forms of audible or detectable crossing indicators. Why then is this even being considered for Accessible Pedestrian Signals and Detectable Warnings? It is a crime to deny people with disabilities the same safety at intersections that is granted to our non-disabled partners in pedestriandom.
With Kindest regards,
Andrea Giudice
Thomas Ghrigsby, October 3, 2002
Reference: Audible Traffic Signals and Detectable Warnings.
COMMENTS:
Most intersections do not require an ATS for the accessibility and safety of blind pedestrians. Only those intersections with complex geometry, complex signalization, or varied signalization for each lane may be appropriate for an ATS. Vibrotactile indicators should be used in preference to audible signals in order to minimize noise distractions and better promote safety. Locator tones should not be included in the final guidelines and may be subject to further research. Detectable Warnings At most intersections the built environment provides ample accessible cues to determine the difference between the sidewalk and the street. A slope of less than 1:15
I urge the Access Board to reconsider the recommendations made in the recent draft guidelines.
Respectfully,
Thomas Ghrigsby
Nancy Karstens, September 9, 2002
Please push for the legislation making detectible warnings manditory. Audible traffic lights and rough places on subway platforms have protected me many times. We need more of them. Thanks,
Nancy Karstens, Omaha Ne.