William M. Browder
|
October 27, 2002 |
BEFORE THE
ARCHITECTURAL AND TRANSPORTATION BARRIERS COMPLIANCE BOARD
___________________________________
DOCKET NO. 02-1: ADA ACCESSIBILITY GUIDELINES FOR
BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES; ABA ACCESSIBILITY GUIDELINES;
PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY
___________________________________
COMMENTS FROM
William M. Browder
___________________________________
The following comments are submitted addressing the Architectural and
Transportation Barriers Compliance Board's (Access Board) draft guidelines on
accessibility in public rights-of-way. The comments are limited to
highway-railroad grade crossing issues presented by the draft guidelines.
Proposed Section 1103.7 -- Flangeway Gaps
Proposed section 1103.7 provides that where pedestrian access routes cross
railroad rights-of-way at grade, the horizontal gap at the inner edge of each
rail shall not exceed 2½ inches, 3 inches in the case of freight railroads.
Current draft guidelines of this provision are acceptable to this nation’s
railroads safety of operations. I am well aware of the Access Board's desire
that the gap be no more than ½ inches to prevent the trapping of wheelchair
casters, but a ½-inch gap could cause railroad derailments.
Recognizing that a gap of 2½ inches, 3 inches for freight operations, is needed
to accommodate the wheels on freight equipment, the Access Board has been
hopeful that a filler could be developed that would provide a ½-inch gap when
railroad freight equipment is not moving along the grade crossing, but expand to
provide the necessary 2½ inch or 3 inch gap when railroad freight equipment
moves across the grade crossing. However, as the Access Board notes, "[a]ttempts
have been made to develop a "gap filler" device, but none of those devices have
been successful." Furthermore, as the Access Board notes, "it is not possible to
reliably predict when research may find a solution."
The maximum gap sizes of 2½ and 3 inches should apply, as the Access Board as
proposed, at the time of construction. Normal wear of the flangeway surfaces
will result in a slightly wider gap over time.
Access Board should support and encourage the research by the Transportation
Research Board (TRB) to solve the flangeway gap problem. A TRB committee on
grade crossings has recommended research. Further, it is undertood that USDOT is
considering support for research in this area.
Proposed Sections 1102.3 and 1111 -- Obstruction of Pedestrian Access
Proposed section 1102.3 provides that whenever a pedestrian access route is
blocked by a temporary condition, such as closing for construction or
maintenance, an alternate "circulation path" shall be provided. Technical
specifications for the alternate path are contained in proposed section 1111.
The problem with the wording of this section is that an alternate circulation
path at grade crossings often will not be feasible or, if feasible, compliance
with the technical requirements of section 1111 might not be possible. There
simply may not be any place an alternate path can be constructed. Grade
crossings are of limited width. If an alternate path is feasible, the technical
requirements of section 1111 might be problematic. For example, a solid wall or
fence might present visibility problems.
Consequently, it is proposed that section 1102.3 be amended to provide that an
alternate circulation path be constructed where feasible and that compliance
with section 1111 also be conditioned on feasibility. It also is suggested that
if an alternate circulation path is not feasible, then instructions on
alternatives available for crossing the right of way should be provided. For
example, if there is a nearby location where a pedestrian could cross, the
location could be posted at the closed crossing.
Accordingly, the following amendments are proposed:
1. Amend section 1102.3 by inserting at the beginning of the first sentence,
"Where feasible, an," and adding a new second sentence as follows:
If an alternate circulation path is infeasible, then signs shall be provided
instructing pedestrians on available alternatives.
2. Amend section 1111 by inserting at the beginning of section 1111.1 the
following: "To the extent feasible, alternate . . . ."
Proposed Sections 1103.8 and 1103.8.1: Changes in Level
The flangeway between rails provides a break in the level of the crossing path.
Consequently, grade crossings do not comply with section 1103.8, addressing
changes in level. While section 1103.8.1 specifically addresses the surface of
pedestrian access routes at grade crossings, that section, too, omits any
reference to flangeway gaps.
Accordingly, it is suggested that sections 1103.8 and 1103.8.1 be amended as
follows:
1. Amend section 1103.8 by inserting in the title after "Level" the following:
"(Except at Rail Crossings)."
2. Amend section 1103.8.1 by inserting after "route" the following: ", except
for the horizontal gap at the inner edge of each rail,."
Respectfully submitted,
William M. Browder