Glenn Crosby
|
October 14, 2002 |
To Whom it May Concern:
I am writing to oppose the draft guidelines proposed by the ATBCB. As I
understand it, the proposal would require the placement of audible pedestrian
signals at all intersections with walk and don't walk signs and detectable
warnings at all intersections.
Blind pedestrians have traveled the streets of this country safely for many
years without the need for these devices, and in my opinion, there is no need to
require them to be virtually everywhere. Instead, the board should make rules
that take a less radical approach to determining where these devices should be
used, and in the rare instance when their use would be beneficial, vibrotactile
signals should be used rather than the noisy, disorienting audible signals that
are proposed.
As for the requirement that detectable warnings be installed at all
intersections, I believe this is an extreme and unnecessary approach to
accessibility. It is a simple matter for most of us to determine where the
sidewalk ends and the street begins at the vast majority of intersections in
this country. Detectable warnings should only be used when there is virtually no
slope or drop off between sidewalk and street.
I am a taxpayer and have been for many years. I want my tax money spent on tools
that will assist me as a blind pedestrian. However, I don't want money spent on
fundamentally flawed rules and regulations. I believe the proposals made by the
Access Board clearly fall into that category, and I would urge you to consider a
less costly and more effective means of insuring that the streets of our nation
will be accessible to me and other blind people.
Sincerely,
Glenn Crosby