[blindlaw] comments needed regarding policyforaudiblepedestriansignals

Tim Shaw timandvickie at hotmail.com
Mon Mar 16 03:51:43 UTC 2009


yes, the only street i cross regularly that has a median is raised and about  6 foot acrosss so i feel safe stopping there if i feel the red light is going t change soon 
> From: ckrugman at sbcglobal.net
> To: blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> Date: Sun, 15 Mar 2009 19:41:00 -0700
> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] comments needed regarding policyforaudiblepedestriansignals
> 
> When I read this this was one of my concerns as well. Most of our medians 
> here are raised and in some cases they are wide enough to have a bit of 
> landscaping on them.
> Chuck
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "McCarthy, Jim" <JMcCarthy at nfb.org>
> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
> Sent: Sunday, March 15, 2009 8:59 AM
> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] comments needed regarding 
> policyforaudiblepedestriansignals
> 
> 
> > Chuck,
> > You bring up streets with medians, which reminds me of a point in the 
> > document that I might question. The document says that it is better for 
> > blind people to complete the entire crossing rather than to wait in a 
> > median, doing the crossing in multiple parts, usually two. I think that 
> > when the person realizes that there is a median, he or she is more 
> > comfortable waiting there. What sometimes happens though is that the 
> > median is not clearly indicated so a blind person is not sure where in the 
> > street area would be safe to wait. I know that when I had a dog, he would 
> > go toward the place with the least obstructions so it was hard to realize 
> > that there might be a median. Medians that are not raised or otherwise 
> > distinguishable to a blind person are highly appropriate places for 
> > detectible warnings and in my experience, probably the most appropriate 
> > places for them. That, of course, is another topic.
> > Jim McCarthy
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On 
> > Behalf Of ckrugman at sbcglobal.net
> > Sent: Saturday, March 14, 2009 1:17 AM
> > To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List
> > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] comments needed regarding policy 
> > foraudiblepedestriansignals
> >
> > thanks. Some of the audible signals that have been installed thus far 
> > installed at appropriate intersections. Others have been installed ast 
> > places where there is a low volume of traffic and where there is a low 
> > demand. Apparently they are wanting to have a more a systematic approach 
> > in place to determine where signals will be installed in the future. We 
> > have many intersections where there are medians crossing several wide 
> > streets where they have not been installed. On these I personally prefer 
> > to at times to divide the crossing in to two sections to pay more 
> > attention to traffic flow. There is another location where they should 
> > probably build a pedestrian crossing either above or below ground. There 
> > is a precedent for a couple of below ground crossings one in downtown 
> > Fresno that was built in the 60's and one that was just opened a couple of 
> > years ago to go under railroad tracks that cut through the campus of the 
> > local community college.
> > There have been some above ground pedestrian crossings of major roads and 
> > freeways to benefit children going to school. As a long-time cane user 
> > trained long before audible signals were fashionable or feasible I still 
> > believe that traffic flow is the best audible signal.
> > Chuck
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "McCarthy, Jim" <JMcCarthy at nfb.org>
> > To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
> > Sent: Friday, March 13, 2009 6:58 AM
> > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] comments needed regarding policy for 
> > audiblepedestriansignals
> >
> >
> >> Chuck,
> >> I am happy to talk through this with you off line if you would prefer.
> >> Nevertheless, I will offer my immediate thoughts after reading. It is
> >> a little unclear what the goal is. This process is to prioritize
> >> intersections giving those most in need APS first. I am convinced
> >> that there are several signalized (light controlled) intersections
> >> that do not need these devices. However, this might be a way to
> >> provide APS at all signalized intersections in time and that may be
> >> what the Access-Board will come to require.
> >>
> >> I think it is good to have as a part of the evaluation team a blind
> >> person and a deaf blind person when the requester is deaf blind or
> >> serves that community. I have always found it problematic though when
> >> cities say that the centers blind people use should have some super
> >> priority. I lived in Portland Oregon and the west part of the city
> >> was hilly with curvy streets. Many were not straight and some had high 
> >> speed traffic.
> >> However, the audible traffic signals were almost never in those
> >> neighborhoods (the better ones I might add) because it was assumed
> >> that blind people did not frequent them. To me that is a ghettoizing
> >> assumption that results from this process. I do think that public
> >> transit centers and such places should have greater attention paid
> >> though and this document would do that.
> >>
> >> Finally, in the main, I think that the traffic and street
> >> configuration factors are as they should be. I think that the
> >> locations with the greatest need based on these factors should be the
> >> first to receive signals. The Fresno process is similar to others I
> >> have seen, though I would prefer that the evaluation group use the 
> >> factors and evaluate all
> >> signalized intersections using the factors more than whether and how
> >> many requests were made.
> >> Jim McCarthy
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org]
> >> On Behalf Of ckrugman at sbcglobal.net
> >> Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2009 8:21 AM
> >> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List
> >> Subject: [blindlaw] comments needed regarding policy for audible
> >> pedestriansignals
> >>
> >> The City of Fresno is proposing the policy shown below to evaluate the
> >> installation of audible traffic signals. As this is outside my
> >> expertise I would appreciate any comments regarding this document.
> >> Please feel free to contact me off list if needed.
> >> Chuck Krugman, M.S.W., Paralegal
> >> 1237 P Street
> >> Fresno ca 93721
> >> 559-266-9237
> >>
> >>
> >> APS Policy-03-09-LP .pdf
> >> DRAFT ACCESSIBLE PEDESTRIAN SIGNALS (APS) INTERSECTION EVALUATION
> >> PROCEDURE BACKGROUND Accessible Pedestrian Signals (APS), also known
> >> as audible pedestrian signals, are devices that communicate
> >> information about pedestrian timing in nonvisual format such as
> >> audible tones, verbal messages, and/or vibrating surfaces. APS are
> >> used in conjunction with standard pedestrian activated traffic signals
> >> to provide the following information to pedestrians:
> >> list of 4 items
> >> ·
> >> Existence of and location of the pedestrian pushbutton · Beginning of
> >> the pedestrian WALK interval · Direction of the crosswalk and location
> >> of the destination curb · Clearance signal interval list end They are
> >> used to assist blind and visually impaired persons and other persons
> >> with disabilities of all ages to cross at designated streets and 
> >> intersections.
> >> PURPOSE
> >> The purpose of this evaluation policy is to set forth factors to be
> >> used by the City of Fresno's Public Works Department, in cooperation
> >> with the City of Fresno's Disability Advisory Commission, in
> >> developing a priority listing of signalized intersection candidates to
> >> be retrofitted with audible devices that will provide guidance for the
> >> blind community and visually impaired persons and other persons with
> >> disabilities of all ages to cross certain streets.
> >> POLICY
> >> It is the policy of the City Council that the retrofitting of existing
> >> traffic signals with APS shall be based on factors established herein
> >> and that such measurements and computations as may be required in
> >> determining priority rating of candidate locations shall be the
> >> responsibility of the Public Works Department.
> >> It should be noted that in special situations, an APS should not be
> >> installed because of the adverse affect it could have on pedestrian
> >> safety as a result of the overall traffic circulation pattern of an
> >> area, or unusual geometric conditions where an APS would not provide
> >> the safety benefits necessary for the blind or visually impaired
> >> individuals to cross a street. It should also be noted that some
> >> traffic signals cannot be retrofitted with APS without major costly
> >> modifications. Retrofitting of traffic signals with APS shall be
> >> subject to approval by the City Engineer.
> >> Important: APS are utilized to help blind and visually impaired
> >> travelers recognize when a WALK signal is operating in a given
> >> direction. An APS may enhance the safety of blind travelers in two ways:
> >> list of 1 items
> >> 1.
> >> Lessens the chance of a blind or visually impaired pedestrian
> >> misjudging when the walk phase is operating, thereby lessening the
> >> chance of accidentally crossing against a signal.
> >> list end
> >> list of 1 items
> >> 2.
> >> Helps blind and visually impaired pedestrians recognize immediately
> >> when the walk phase begins, permitting them to cross the street in a
> >> timely fashion, thereby lessening the chance of being in the
> >> intersection when the signal changes.
> >> list end
> >> However, it is important to recognize that the APS does not and cannot
> >> assure the blind and visually impaired pedestrians that there will be
> >> no potential traffic conflicts while crossing when the APS is
> >> operating. In particular, the blind and visually impaired pedestrians
> >> should be aware of at least four possible conflicts.
> >> list of 4 items
> >> 1.
> >> Vehicles may be still clearing the intersection when the APS comes on.
> >> 2.
> >> Vehicles may fail to stop for the red light. This is particularly
> >> common for motorists attempting to enter on a yellow light.
> >> 3.
> >> Motorists may stop and make a right turn on red while watching traffic
> >> on their left but may fail to notice pedestrians on their right.
> >> 4.
> >> Vehicles may have right and left turns on the same phase as the
> >> pedestrian.
> >> list end
> >> Because of these potential conflicts, it is important that the blind
> >> or visually impaired traveler exercise due caution for his or her
> >> well-being when crossing a street, whether or not it is equipped with
> >> APS. It is especially important that blind and visually impaired
> >> travelers be properly trained by certified orientation and mobility
> >> specialists in safe travel techniques on the public right-of-way.
> >> EVALUATION PROCEDURE (See attached "Evaluation Form.") The following
> >> basic considerations and evaluation factors shall be utilized to
> >> determine whether a location is eligible to be a candidate for APS and
> >> to determine its relative position on the priority list. Evaluation
> >> and scoring of factors will be conducted by an evaluation team
> >> consisting of a certified orientation-mobility specialist, a visually
> >> impaired/blind traveler and a traffic engineer. Candidate locations
> >> shall be requested by the City of Fresno Disability Advisory
> >> Commission, its working groups, and constituent requests to the ADA 
> >> Coordinator's office.
> >> Candidate locations will be evaluated by means of the sample
> >> evaluation sheet attached.
> >> I. BASIC CONSIDERATIONS:
> >> APS normally will be considered for installation only if the following
> >> conditions are met:
> >> list of 5 items
> >> A.
> >> Intersections must be signalized.
> >> B.
> >> Signals must be susceptible to retrofitting.
> >> C.
> >> Signals should be equipped with pedestrian signal actuations. (See
> >> also section on "Signals without Pedestrian Actuations.") D.
> >> Location must be suitable to installation of audible signals, in terms
> >> of surrounding land use, noise level and neighborhood acceptance.
> >> E.
> >> There must be a demonstrated need for the audible signals in the form
> >> of a request from an individual or group that would use the audible 
> >> signal.
> >> list end
> >> II EVALUATION FACTORS
> >> The following factors shall be used to establish a priority listing
> >> for potential audible traffic signal candidates. Candidates will be
> >> arranged in priority order of those with the highest total points (100
> >> points
> >> maximum) on top and then in descending order. The scoring of factors
> >> will be conducted by an evaluation team consistent of a mobility
> >> specialist, a visually impaired/blind traveler and a traffic engineer.
> >> If the request for an APS was made by a deaf blind individual, or by
> >> representative of an organization serving deaf blind pedestrians in
> >> order to improve access in their geographic area, the evaluation team
> >> may also include a deaf blind rater. The decision whether to include a
> >> deaf blind rater will be made by the City Engineer.
> >> A) Intersection Safety
> >> 1. Accident Records: Past pedestrian accident experience at the
> >> intersection will be used as an indication of potential safety
> >> performance. Points will be based on pedestrian accidents reported by
> >> the City of Fresno's Police Department.
> >>
> >> table with 3 columns and 6 rows
> >> Pedestrian Accidents
> >> Period
> >> Points
> >> 1
> >> 4 years
> >> 1
> >> 2
> >> 4 years
> >> 2
> >> 3
> >> 4 years
> >> 3
> >> 4
> >> 4 years
> >> 4
> >> 5 or more
> >> 4 years
> >> 5
> >> table end
> >>
> >> 2. Intersection Configuration: The number of approaches to an
> >> intersection and their geometric configuration (offset, skewed, etc.)
> >> affect the ability of the blind and visually impaired persons crossing 
> >> the roadway.
> >> In particular, traffic at 3-leg intersections tends not to provide
> >> adequate audible clues for the blind to permit them to effectively
> >> judge the signal phase.
> >>
> >> table with 2 columns and 6 rows
> >> Configuration
> >> Points
> >> 4-leg right angle intersection
> >> 1
> >> 3-leg T-intersection
> >> 2
> >> 3 or 4-leg skewed intersection
> >> 3
> >> 4-leg offset intersection
> >> 4
> >> Other complex or multiple leg intersections
> >> 5
> >> table end
> >>
> >> Note: Intersections with 5 or more legs will require special design.
> >> 3. Intersection Signalization: Pre-timed intersections are the easiest
> >> for blind pedestrian because the phase interval is constant and can be
> >> observed over time. Vehicle actuated intersections are more difficult,
> >> because the pedestrian interval may be of different lengths or skipped
> >> all together. Split-phasing can provide confusing auditory
> >> information, as a traveler may interpret left-turning vehicles as a 
> >> parallel traffic surge.
> >>
> >> table with 2 columns and 5 rows
> >> Signalization
> >> Points
> >> Pre-timed
> >> 0
> >> Vehicle Actuated
> >> 2
> >> Split Phasing
> >> 4
> >> Exclusive Ped Phase (for future reference)
> >> 5
> >> table end
> >>
> >> 4.
> >> Width of Crossing:
> >> Wider streets are more difficult for blind travelers to cross. If each
> >> leg of the intersection has a different width, points will be assigned
> >> on the basis of the widest street on which pedestrians are permitted
> >> to cross.
> >> Crossing
> >> width will be measured at the point pedestrians normally cross the 
> >> street.
> >> Islands
> >> and medians will be included in the total crossing distance even if
> >> they are equipped with separate pedestrian signal actuators. These
> >> points will be apportioned based upon the greatest width of the
> >> crossing at the subject intersection.
> >>
> >> table with 2 columns and 7 rows
> >> Width of Crossing
> >> Points
> >> 40 feet or less
> >> 0
> >> 40 to 59 feet
> >> 1
> >> 60 to 79 feet
> >> 2
> >> 80 to 99 feet
> >> 3
> >> 100 -119
> >> 4
> >> 120 feet or more
> >> 5
> >> table end
> >>
> >> 5. Vehicle Speed: The speed of approaching traffic reflects the
> >> ability of approaching traffic to stop for a pedestrian clearing the
> >> intersection as the lights change. Audible signals help blind
> >> pedestrians get a timely start at the beginning of the walk phase,
> >> thereby permitting clearing the intersection in a timely manner.
> >> Points are assigned on the basis of the 85 percentile speed on the
> >> fastest approach leg. More points are assigned on the basis of higher 
> >> speeds.
> >>
> >> table with 2 columns and 6 rows
> >> Speed Range
> >> Points
> >> 0 - 25 mph
> >> 1
> >> 26 - 30 mph
> >> 2
> >> 31 - 35 mph
> >> 3
> >> 36 - 40 mph
> >> 4
> >> 41 mph or over
> >> 5
> >> table end
> >>
> >> B. Crosswalk Characteristics
> >> These points will be apportioned based upon the highest-scoring
> >> characteristics of any of the crosswalks at the intersection. For
> >> example, if any of the crosswalks at an intersection have a median
> >> island protruding into an intersection, then the intersection will
> >> receive the two points allotted for that characteristic.
> >> list of 1 items
> >> (a)
> >> Location of Pedestrian Push Button. Pedestrian push buttons that are
> >> too far from the intersection can present difficulties for blind
> >> pedestrians. They may make it harder for an individual to use the
> >> button as a cue for alignment and/or to push the button and cross in
> >> the same cycle.
> >> list end
> >>
> >> table with 2 columns and 4 rows
> >> Location of Pedestrian Actuations
> >> Points
> >> One or more ped pushbuttons located > 10 ft from curb
> >> 1
> >> One or more ped pushbuttons located > 5 ft from crosswalk extended
> >> 2
> >> One or more ped pushbuttons out of alignment with direction of travel
> >> 2
> >> table end
> >>
> >> list of 1 items
> >> (b)
> >> Median Islands Blind pedestrians have difficulties interpreting
> >> traffic clues at medians and islands. Efforts should be made to permit
> >> the blind to cross in one continuous movement. In such cases, signal
> >> timing should be extended to accommodate the full crossing. Divided
> >> streets with or without a pedestrian signal actuator in the median
> >> will be handled as a single crossing, with the width measured across
> >> the entire street.
> >> list end
> >>
> >> table with 2 columns and 2 rows
> >> Median Island
> >> Points
> >> Protruding into crosswalk, or cut through.
> >> 2
> >> table end
> >>
> >> list of 1 items
> >> (c)
> >> Alignment of Crosswalk. A skewed crosswalk is one in which the
> >> direction of travel on the crosswalk differs from that on the
> >> approaching sidewalk. In this context, skew is not defined as the
> >> angle at which streets intersect. If a blind pedestrian walking a
> >> straight line from the approaching sidewalk is headed toward parallel
> >> traffic lanes, the crosswalk is skewed. If the pedestrian would end up
> >> deviating from the crosswalk, but would still arrive at the opposite
> >> corner, the crosswalk is not defined as skewed for this purpose.
> >> list end
> >> Skewed Crosswalk
> >> 4
> >> (d) Distance to Alternative APS
> >>
> >> table with 2 columns and 6 rows
> >> Distance to Alternative APS Crosswalk
> >> Points
> >> 1 block
> >> 0
> >> 2 blocks
> >> 0
> >> 3 blocks
> >> 2
> >> 4 blocks
> >> 2
> >> 5 or more blocks
> >> 3
> >> table end
> >>
> >> (e) Requests for APS
> >> New requests for APS will be recorded by the ADA Coordinator.
> >> Requestors will be asked to specify the reason for the request (e.g.
> >> proximity on a route to school or work), the difficulty they encounter
> >> at the intersection, and the time of day that presents the greatest
> >> difficulty. This information may be used by the Orientation and
> >> Mobility Evaluation team in assessing the intersection.
> >>
> >> table with 2 columns and 4 rows
> >> APS Requests
> >> Points
> >> 1 request
> >> 1
> >> 2 recent documented requests
> >> 2
> >> 3 or more recent, documented requests
> >> 3-4
> >> table end
> >>
> >> B) Pedestrian Usage
> >> Blind pedestrians share many characteristics with the sighted
> >> population in that they go to public places, business, social,
> >> educational and medical facilities. At the same time they have special
> >> needs. For example, they may have a greater reliance on public
> >> transportation than sighted persons. Audible signals should be placed
> >> with the view of improving mobility of blind persons and making more
> >> facilities accessible to them. Proximity of signals to these
> >> facilities may assure a greater degree of utilization.
> >> list of 1 items
> >> 1.
> >> Proximity to facilities for people who are blind or visually impaired:
> >> This includes the
> >> Department of Rehabilitation, Social Security offices, Valley Center
> >> for the Blind and other similar facilities. Special consideration may
> >> be given to senior citizens complexes or public housing facilities
> >> that have one or more blind or visually impaired persons in residence.
> >> Points are assigned on the basis of blocks or distance (1 block equals
> >> 400
> >> feet) from proposed APS site to subject facility. The closer the two
> >> are, the more points are assigned.
> >> list end
> >>
> >> table with 2 columns and 6 rows
> >> Proximity
> >> Points
> >> 4 to 6 blocks
> >> 2
> >> 3 blocks
> >> 4
> >> 2 blocks
> >> 6
> >> 1 block
> >> 8
> >> At subject facility
> >> 10
> >> table end
> >>
> >> 2. Proximity to key facilities utilized by all pedestrians (blind and
> >> sighted.): This includes
> >> medical, educational, social, recreational, shopping, commercial,
> >> business, public and governmental facilities. Points are assigned on
> >> the basis of blocks or distance (1 block equals 400 feet) from
> >> proposed APS site to subject facility. In case of multiple facilities,
> >> points will be assigned on the basis of the closest facility.
> >>
> >> table with 2 columns and 6 rows
> >> Proximity
> >> Points
> >> 4 to 6 blocks
> >> 1
> >> 3 blocks
> >> 2
> >> 2 blocks
> >> 3
> >> 1 block
> >> 4
> >> At subject facility
> >> 5
> >> table end
> >>
> >> 3. Access to public transit: Because blind and visually impaired
> >> persons rely heavily upon public transportation (bus or trolley),
> >> special consideration will be given to those proposed APS sites that
> >> have heavy general use, serves any of the facilities indicated above
> >> (Ref. B-1 and B-2), or serves as a transfer point and serves 2 or more
> >> transit routes within a one-block walking distance.
> >> list of 1 items
> >> a)
> >> Number of transit stops and/or transit routes within one block of
> >> proposed audible signal site.
> >> list end
> >>
> >> table with 2 columns and 6 rows
> >> Number of Routes and Stops
> >> Points
> >> 1 - 2 routes and 1 stop
> >> 1
> >> 3 or more routes and 1 stop
> >> 2
> >> 1 - 2 routes and 2 stops
> >> 3
> >> 3 or more routes and 2 stops
> >> 4
> >> 2 or more routes and more than 2 stops
> >> 5
> >> table end
> >>
> >> b) Passenger usage is based upon the total passengers boarding and
> >> debarking each day at a transit stop or transfer point within a
> >> one-block walking distance.
> >>
> >> table with 2 columns and 7 rows
> >> Passengers Boarding and Debarking Each Day Points 0 - 49 0
> >> 50-149
> >> 1
> >> 150-249
> >> 2
> >> 250-499
> >> 3
> >> 500-999
> >> 4
> >> 1,000 and over
> >> 5
> >> table end
> >>
> >> C) Traffic Conditions
> >> Vehicle volumes, traffic distribution, traffic congestion and flow
> >> characteristics may assist or impede the blind traveler in crossing an
> >> intersection. Blind pedestrians can function best when crossing
> >> signalized intersections that are at right angles with a moderate but
> >> steady flow of traffic through the intersection on each leg and with a
> >> minimum of turning movements (right or left turns). Traffic that stops
> >> on each leg during each signal cycle is particularly helpful. Traffic
> >> that is either light, or very heavy, or erratic in its flow makes it
> >> difficult for the blind traveler to pick up audible clues as to
> >> whether the light is red or green. In such cases, audible signals will
> >> assist in determining when it is possible to cross the street. Points
> >> may be assigned by the evaluation team based upon their perception of
> >> the relative importance of each of these factors (which are not
> >> necessarily dependent upon the total average daily traffic). Candidate
> >> locations may score up to a maximum of 5 points for each of the
> >> following factors depending upon overall traffic distribution.
> >>
> >> table with 3 columns and 6 rows
> >> Heavy Traffic Flow
> >> Vehicles per hour
> >> Points
> >> Approach traffic on all legs is in excess of 2,000 vehicles per hour
> >> during any peak hour.
> >> 2,000 - 2,999
> >> 1
> >> Approach traffic on all legs is in excess of 2,000 vehicles per hour
> >> during any peak hour.
> >> 3,000 - 3,999
> >> 2
> >> Approach traffic on all legs is in excess of 2,000 vehicles per hour
> >> during any peak hour.
> >> 4,000 - 4,999
> >> 3
> >> Approach traffic on all legs is in excess of 2,000 vehicles per hour
> >> during any peak hour.
> >> 5,000 - 5,999
> >> 4
> >> Approach traffic on all legs is in excess of 2,000 vehicles per hour
> >> during any peak hour.
> >> 6,000 and over
> >> 5
> >> table end
> >>
> >> table with 3 columns and 7 rows
> >> Off Peak Traffic Presence Direction 1
> >> Points
> >> At least two vehicles present on both directions on parallel street,
> >> expressed as a percentage of ten cycles.
> >> Constant (≥ 90%)
> >> 0
> >> At least two vehicles present on both directions on parallel street,
> >> expressed as a percentage of ten cycles.
> >> Heavy (70-80%)
> >> 1
> >> At least two vehicles present on both directions on parallel street,
> >> expressed as a percentage of ten cycles.
> >> Moderate (50-60%)
> >> 2
> >> At least two vehicles present on both directions on parallel street,
> >> expressed as a percentage of ten cycles.
> >> Light (30-40%)
> >> 3
> >> At least two vehicles present on both directions on parallel street,
> >> expressed as a percentage of ten cycles.
> >> Occasional (<30%)
> >> 4
> >> At least two vehicles present on both directions on parallel street,
> >> expressed as a percentage of ten cycles.
> >> None (no through lanes to create surge noise.
> >> 5
> >> table end
> >>
> >> table with 3 columns and 7 rows
> >> Off Peak Traffic Presence
> >> Direction 2
> >> Points
> >> At least two vehicles present on both directions on parallel street,
> >> expressed as a percentage of ten cycles.
> >> Constant (≥ 90%)
> >> 0
> >> At least two vehicles present on both directions on parallel street,
> >> expressed as a percentage of ten cycles.
> >> Heavy (70-80%)
> >> 1
> >> At least two vehicles present on both directions on parallel street,
> >> expressed as a percentage of ten cycles.
> >> Moderate (50-60%)
> >> 2
> >> At least two vehicles present on both directions on parallel street,
> >> expressed as a percentage of ten cycles.
> >> Light (30-40%)
> >> 3
> >> At least two vehicles present on both directions on parallel street,
> >> expressed as a percentage of ten cycles.
> >> Occasional (<30%)
> >> 4
> >> At least two vehicles present on both directions on parallel street,
> >> expressed as a percentage of ten cycles.
> >> None (no through lanes to create surge noise.
> >> 5
> >> table end
> >>
> >> E.) Mobility Evaluation
> >> Each intersection being considered for audible signals should be
> >> evaluated by a certified orientation and mobility specialist. Based on
> >> the judgment of the O-M specialist and the evaluation team, additional
> >> points may be assigned based on observed or special conditions not
> >> adequately covered by any of the previous factors. This may include a
> >> heavy right-turn volume, right-turn island, right-turn signals,
> >> limited cone of "visibility", etc.
> >> Points
> >> Mobility and miscellaneous factors
> >> 0-15
> >> Signals without Pedestrian Actuations
> >> Signalized intersections without pedestrian actuations may be
> >> considered for evaluation under this priority system, provided the
> >> following conditions are met:
> >> list of 3 items
> >> 1.
> >> There must be a demonstrated problem or need that can be alleviated by
> >> the installation of an audible signal in the form of a request from an
> >> individual or group that would use the audible signal.
> >> 2.
> >> The evaluation team must unanimously concur with the need.
> >> 3.
> >> Appropriate pedestrian actuation buttons and circuits must be provided
> >> as part of the APS installation.
> >> list end
> >> Accessible Signals at New Signal Installations Accessible signals will
> >> be considered for new signal installation if it is determined that
> >> installation is warranted by the criteria established above.
> >> Public Notice of Installation of Accessible Signals The City
> >> recognizes that the installation of an APS may be of interest to the
> >> community, especially residents in the immediate vicinity of the
> >> candidate intersection. In addition, research has indicated that APS
> >> are more effectively used by blind and visually impaired pedestrians
> >> if they have notice of its location and a basic understanding of the
> >> type of signal installed.
> >> Accordingly, the Director of Public Works will provide a notice to
> >> neighbors in a 350 feet radius from the intersection of the proposed
> >> installation of an APS at that site, and invite concerned citizens to
> >> contact him in writing. In addition, the Department of Public Works
> >> will issue press releases and informing the public and organizations
> >> serving people with disabilities, especially visual impairments, of
> >> type and location of proposed and installed APS.
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> blindlaw mailing list
> >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> >> blindlaw:
> >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/jmccarthy%40
> >> nfb.org
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> blindlaw mailing list
> >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> >> blindlaw:
> >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40s
> >> bcglobal.net
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > blindlaw mailing list
> > blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
> > blindlaw:
> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/jmccarthy%40nfb.org
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > blindlaw mailing list
> > blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
> > blindlaw:
> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglobal.net
> > 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw:
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/timandvickie%40hotmail.com

_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live™ Contacts: Organize your contact list. 
http://windowslive.com/connect/post/marcusatmicrosoft.spaces.live.com-Blog-cns!503D1D86EBB2B53C!2285.entry?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_UGC_Contacts_032009


More information about the BlindLaw mailing list