Michael D. Barber

October 20, 2002

I wish to express my opposition to audible pedestrian warnings and detectable warnings (truncated domes) at street crossings. I object for the following reasons: 1. While I believe there may be a few of the newer type intersections (such as roundabouts and some five-way intersections) which may necessitate some sort of audible crossing signals, I don't believe every
intersection necessitates them. And I definitely do not approve of the
continuous, obnoxious signals which annoy neighbors and impede safe crossing of intersections because it's difficult to hear the traffic patterns when these signals are emitting their churps and other noises.

I have traveled with the long white cane for over 40 years and have successfully crossed many hundreds of major and not so major intersections in many different cities, all without audible signals to assist me. As I indicated above, some of the more modern intersections may require some sort of audible signals, such as an audible voice indicating when it's okay to cross. But even though these signals may be used, one still must depend on the traffic pattern to be sure. For instance, just because the light turns green in hyour favor, it doesn't mean you don't look carefully before you cross to be sure someone isn't running a light. The same is true with a blind person. We're taught to listen carefully to traffic patterns so we can cross successfully. 2. I do not support the use of truncated domes at crosswalks where the gradient doesn't meet certain standards. In those cases, I suggest that the gradients of those crosswalks be changed so that there is no doubt that you are coming to an intersection.

Thank you.

Sincerely,
Michael D. Barber