Jennifer Campos

October 25, 2002

 

On behalf of the City of Vancouver, Washington, I am submitting comments regarding the recently released Draft Guidelines for Accessible Public Rights-of-Way by the Access Board.  The City is very supportive of the Board’s decision to create guidelines for the public right-of-way, but we do have some concerns over several of the proposed requirements.

Below I have listed our comments below by section number.  Assume that if any part of the guidelines is not mentioned, that we support what you have proposed. 

 

1104.3.2 Detectable Warnings. Detectable warning surfaces complying with 1108 shall be provided, where a curb ramp, landing, or blended transition connects to a crosswalk.

We strongly feel that this requirement is unnecessary and over burdensome.  Detectable warnings should not be placed at all curb ramps or landings, but only in those cases where it would be difficult for someone to detect where the sidewalk ends and the street begins.  This would be at rail crossings, platform edges, blended transitions, or ramps that have a slope of 1:15 or less.

1105.2.2 Cross Slope. The cross slope shall be 1:48 maximum measured perpendicular to the direction of pedestrian travel.

EXCEPTION: This requirement shall not apply to mid-block crossings.

1105.2.3 Running Slope. The running slope shall be 1:20 maximum measured parallel to the direction of pedestrian travel in the crosswalk.

Both of these requirements would place a huge burden on the City in trying to meet the standards since it would apply to all streets regardless of any outside circumstances that we would have no control over.  This should be a guideline that jurisdictions should strive for while designing their roadways in order to improve pedestrian safety, but it would be impossible for many if not most areas to meet it in all cases.

1105.3 Pedestrian Signal Phase Timing. All pedestrian signal phase timing shall be calculated using a pedestrian walk speed of 3.0 feet per second (0.91 m/s) maximum. The total crosswalk distance used in calculating pedestrian signal phase timing shall include the entire length of the crosswalk plus the length of the curb ramp.

Requiring this change in signal timing would ensure much higher delays for all users.  The requirement would be applicable on streets that were not overly wide and had curb returns over 25’, but unfortunately this is not how many of our streets are built today.  We currently respond to the request for more crossing time on a case by case basis, or any place we feel there are users who will benefit from the change.

1105.6 Roundabouts. Where pedestrian crosswalks and pedestrian facilities are provided at roundabouts, they shall comply with 1105.6.

1105.6.1 Separation. Continuous barriers shall be provided along the street side of the sidewalk where pedestrian crossing is prohibited. Where railings are used, they shall have a bottom rail 15 inches (380 mm) maximum above the pedestrian access route.

1105.6.2 Signals. A pedestrian activated traffic signal complying with 1106 shall be provided for each segment of the crosswalk, including the splitter island. Signals shall clearly identify which crosswalk segment the signal serves.

This portion of the proposed guidelines has to be the most excessive and unnecessary part of the entire guidelines.  To require signals at all legs of roundabouts completely defeats the purpose of building a roundabout in the first place.  The board mentions that roundabouts have become popular in the U.S because they “add vehicle capacity and reduce delay.”  These are not the only reasons and it would be careless of you to not recognize the most important benefits. 

Roundabouts have become so successful because the virtually eliminate all accidents at intersections.  This is not just automobile accidents, but pedestrian accidents as well.  They do so by reducing the number of conflict points and more importantly reduce the speeds of motorists entering the intersection.  When motorists drive slower they are more able to take account of their surroundings, making conditions much safer for pedestrians for crossing.  We recognize that blind or visually impaired pedestrians can have difficulties crossing at roundabouts, but to install signals at all legs would make them cost prohibitive compared to a regular signalized intersection.

Because navigating the sidewalks around the edge of a roundabout is not different than navigating any other intersection, the need for barriers is completely unnecessary.  Curb ramps are installed at roundabouts to indicate crossing locations just as they are for any other type of intersection.

1105.7 Turn Lanes at Intersections. Where pedestrian crosswalks are provided at right or left turn slip lanes, a pedestrian activated traffic signal complying with 1106 shall be provided for each segment of the pedestrian crosswalk, including at the channelizing island.

Rather than require signals at slip lanes for pedestrians, why not just prohibit their use?  This would make much more sense, and would completely eliminate the pedestrian/auto conflict that a signal probably would not prevent.

1106.2 Pedestrian Signal Devices. Each crosswalk with pedestrian signal indication shall have a signal device which includes audible and vibrotactile indications of the WALK interval. Where a pedestrian pushbutton is provided, it shall be integrated into the signal device and shall comply with 1106.3.

We know that most of the controversy surrounding these guidelines has revolved around the audible signal requirement and we feel that to require an audible signal at every intersection with a WALK interval is cost burdensome and unrealistic.  For new signals the installation cost would not be significant, but the impacts to the environment would be enormous.  Imagine walking in the downtown of a city with a 200 ft street grid system and signals at every intersection.  The noise pollution would be substantial and in some cases people may be confused thinking that it is their intersection giving them priority when it actually is another signal just down the street.

We work with the local blind community to prioritize needed audible signal locations, and try to install as many devices as we can.  We get requests from people who have difficulty reading a certain intersection, and they have made it clear that they do not want audible signals at every intersection.

1109.2 Parallel Parking Spaces. An access aisle at least 60 inches (1525 mm) wide shall be provided at street level the full length of the parking space. The access aisle shall connect to a pedestrian access route serving the space. The access aisle shall not encroach on the vehicular travel lane.

It would be impossible to install and maintain a disabled parking spot on each block of parallel parking.  In areas where the block faces are around 200 feet in length, this would be an onerous requirement, specifically when it would come to regulating the parking spaces.  Again, this concept would work better on a case by case basis, rather than making a blanket requirement.

If you have any questions regarding our comments please don’t hesitate to contact me at [ ... ]

Sincerely,

Jennifer Campos
Associate Transportation Planner