Karen Ozmun

October 28, 2002

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