|October 28, 2002|
Hello Members of the Access-Board,
I am Donna Hartzell from Searcy, Arkansas, which is located about an hour north northeast of Little Rock, and I am blind. I would like to make just a couple of comments regarding the new regulations being considered for audible traffic signals and for tactile warnings.
I believe that mandatory use of audible traffic signals at every lighted intersection is not a good idea for the following reasons--
1. Some of the signals are confusing, (like the ones with the bird sounds) and cause more difficulty than assistance in crossing. Additionally, blind travelers use traffic patterns and sounds to make a safe street crossing and extra noises make it more difficult to get the information you need from these sounds.
2. Blind persons who do not have good travel skills may get a false sense of security as a result of using the signals and not listen for the vehicles who will inevitably run the light.
3. The sheer cost is going to be prohibitive and cause hardship on cities and small towns alike.
However, I do agree that some type of audible warning might be helpful in a limited number of very high traffic areas or very confusing intersections with unusual traffic patterns.
Secondly--I feel that the use of truncated domes and similar highly raised warnings may be hazardous to persons without a vision loss but who have a mobility impairment and would like for you again to use caution and good sense when deciding what type of warnings might be helpful. Something much less obstructive, I think. Thank You.
index previous comment next comment