Tami Jones

October 6, 2002

As a blind traveler, I am strongly opposed to the blanket installation of audible traffic signals, of whatever kind, on every corner where walk/don't walk traffic signals are present. The signals I have encountered up to this point, whether they beep, chirp or buzz, have not been helpful in determining the true traffic patterns. In fact, they have often distracted me, or masked the sounds of traffic moving near me, which is a much safer means of determining when to cross an intersection. Only occasionally have I encountered an intersection which is so wide or complicated that traffic patterns cannot be used as my guide; in these cases, I've often noticed that drivers are as confused as I am, or are over-eager to beat the light, so an audible traffic signal could give a false sense of security and mask the sound of on-coming traffic.

For those few complicated intersections, I would prefer a tactile signal, which would be pedestrian activated. This would assist deaf-blind travelers, as well, since they, rather than the blind, are at a disadvantage in most cases.

Too often, people believe that gadgets are the panacea for all ills that beset the blind. Rather it is the confidence resulting from proper training which is most needed. By adopting this blanket requirement, The Access Board will be doing a dis-service to the blind--allowing government officials to feel that gismos can solve all our problems, and giving them an excuse to fail to provide what we need most--sufficient, competent training to instill confidence in our own mobility skills.

Please modify any rule you adopt to only apply to complicated intersections where audible cues are not sufficient to provide complete information, and provide tactile rather than audible signals where some accommodation is needed.

Tami Jones