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
index
previous comment
next comment