Mickey Fixsen
|
October 4, 2002 |
Dear Access Board Members;
We, the blind, do NOT need audible traffic signals! We have been getting around
our cities and towns for decades without them. I agree that there are
increasingly more computer controlled traffic signals which do not present the
pedestrian community with a consistent pattern of signaling in which to judge
when it is the correct time to cross the intersection. There are also, in very
limited numbers, some very complex intersections that might be benefitted by
having accessible pedestrian walk signals. However, your proposed rule requiring
all intersections which are equipped with visual pedestrian signals also be
equipped with accessible signals is totally unnecessary and a huge waste of
public resources. Each intersection should be considered for accessible
pedestrian signals on a case-by-case basis in consultation with the Blind of the
community. Only those intersections with complex configurations or confusing
signaling should even be considered for special accessible signals and they
should only be installed if the blind of the community that use them deem them
necessary.
Any accessible traffic signals which are deemed necessary for a given
intersection should not be audible, but must be the tactile type. More chirps,
beeps, clicks, whistles and other noise added to the environment simply causes
more confusion and masks traffic sounds making crossing streets MORE dangerous.
We, the blind, must be able to hear the traffic clearly, without the addition of
more noise to the audible environment, so that we can safely walk around our
communities.
Detectable pedestrian warnings, truncated domes, as proposed are completely
unnecessary. The blind have been safely traveling in the existing environment
since the beginning of time. With proper training, we do not need to remake the
world for us. In fact, remaking the world has made it more difficult for us in
some instances. The flattening of sidewalk to street corners where there is no
longer much slope or defining curb line causes problems. Truncated domes,
however, are not the proper answer to the problem. The simplest and most cost
effective answer is to mold a 3/4 inch to 1 inch tall curb which resembles the
normal curb but much shorter. This area is always formed in some fashion or
other, anyway, as the cement is installed and requires no added expense or
special equipment. The blind are used to finding curbs and they make the best
detector for us to use to delineate between the street and sidewalk. The short
curb, if made properly, should present no problem for ANY other pedestrians or
wheelchairs.
Truncated domes bring their own set of problems. They require special equipment
and time to install which greatly adds to the cost of any project. They are hard
to clean and retain snow, ice, water, dirt, leaves and such making a slippery
area which is hazardous to ALL pedestrians. I have heard that they are a serious
hazard to women wearing high heels. Cities will have to expend hard to come by
resources of personnel and monies to try and avoid the liabilities presented by
the maintenance difficulties of these areas. These truncated domes and warning
areas tell the public that blind persons are inferior and must be taken care of
when this is not the truth. Animosity builds up in the community against the
blind for these costly and hazardous areas in our sidewalks.
Someone is always coming up with a new way to "take care of the blind" and "keep
the blind safe". Leave us Alone! With proper training and others not fouling up
the world too much, we can get around just fine.
Please do not implement the rules as currently proposed for they are much too
broad sweeping and financially irresponsible. They will also cause more problems
than they are supposed to solve and in many instances make our world much more
dangerous.
Sincerely,
Mickey Fixsen
index
previous comment
next comment