[Ctabs] [Ct-nfb] December Meeting of the Waterbury Area Chapter

Sun Nov 27 03:21:17 UTC 2016

All,

I am glad to read such a lively discussion on the good—and much of the bad—of audible pedestrian signals.  It’s good that we’re discussing this, considering a spectrum of perspectives, and hopefully challenging ourselves and our assumptions of what we can do as blind people.  I would remind us, though, that our immediate goal should be the ultimate goal of the original advertisement that was sent: to grow the Federation.  And that must mean helping to ensure that our Waterbury chapter grows in its understanding of what the Federation stands for and has stood for over the years, reaches out to new members, and successfully advocates with local elected leaders and public servants.  Gary, Josephine (if you are on this list), and my fellow officers and board members: again, let me know if there is something I specifically can do to assist our Waterbury chapter have a successful meeting and provide some understanding of this and other issues that we stand for, offer my experience as a sort of engineer advocated with by the public (not having to do with traffic signals but rather with coastal flooding and erosion issues at this point in my career), and my own experience as a blind person who has used the alternative techniques of blindness that we believe in—and that Justin teaches with such love and passion—on a daily basis in all kinds of interesting environments many of which I could never have expected.

I will add my point of view and experience which likely falls right along with that of Jim and Rich and somewhere between Justin and Eileen.  I have been fortunate to have had cane travel training—and training in the many other alternative techniques of blindness—by some of the best instructors in the world at one of the best training programs in the world.  I have used those techniques everywhere from north central Louisiana to the high desert of southern California to Davis and Sacramento and San Francisco to small New England towns, the wilds of downtown Bridgeport and New Haven, every end of Manhattan, and Dublin and small villages in Ireland.  I can do so with no special adaptation to the built environment.  Now everything from Braille on a restroom door, Braille on an elevator, truncated domes on a curb cut which I have heard those who know little about blindness (including a tour guide in Savanna, Georgia) refer to as Braille for the feet, and audible (which may also include vibrotactile arrows making them more “accessible” than just audible) pedestrian signals do tend to be helpful for their intended purpose when I find them; often another technique that I’m using, like asking a passerby for directions, finding the slant of the curb cut with my cane, and listening to traffic allows me to get where I’m going before I notice these adaptations in the first place.  I must say that the strategically placed audible pedestrian signal along the Post Road in Fairfield at a street with little cross traffic is one that I use regularly being that it is on my way to and from the train station, and I do prefer it to the intersection one block away that also has little cross traffic (actually it has none; it’s a T intersection), unless I need to be on the other side of the Post Road in that block for another reason like going to the pharmacy on my way home.  But I wouldn’t ask that one be installed along the Post Road at the intersection to which I am nearest because it does have significant cross traffic, and my wife, who is also blind and had the same blindness training as I did, and I have little hesitation to travel across that intersection and take our infant son with us in a carrier or stroller.  My point in my first post on this topic was to emphasize that we as a statewide affiliate can and should advocate that our elected leaders invest tax dollars in good orientation and mobility training, something which they and the state bureaucracy are not really willing to do.  I still mean what I said at our state convention to Brian Sigman: the NFB of Connecticut will stand with BESB so that they can get the funding that they need or exemptions to any hiring freeze to fill the vacant O&M instructor position.  We have an opportunity in the new year to make this a legislative priority.

But we must more immediately help our Waterbury chapter be effective in what they intend to do in their advocacy with their local elected leaders next month.  My point of view on accessible pedestrian signals as well as Jim and Rich’s, Justin’s (though he must rightly train his students to travel safely without them, and I’m sure that their excessive use where he works must rightly frustrate him), and to a degree Eileen’s is the official position of the Federation.  The most recent resolution on accessible pedestrian signals (APSs) is 2002-16.  I’ll copy the text below my signature; the resolution may seem arcane and does refer to Federal government rule making nearly 15 years ago, but the two key policy statements are the whereas statements:

1.       That the Federation urged “that the ATBCB mandate APSs in situations only where the built environment did not provide sufficient nonvisual clues for a blind pedestrian to know when it was safe to cross and that all APSs be vibrotactile so that unneeded and distracting noise not be emitted into intersections”

2.       …at the majority of intersections the existing environment and traffic pattern provide sufficient nonvisual cues for blind persons to cross the street safely without APSs, and blind people do so every day

(The important word in my latter quote is “majority”; we don’t say all and we don’t say none.)  The correct understanding of the Federation’s position is that we are balanced.  We default to good training, life experience, and straightforward common sense.  But we do recognize that there are some intersections where special access to the pedestrian signal, such as one along a major road where the cross street has little cross traffic may be the sort of place where having access is likely to be useful, should be given priority in expending transportation tax dollars, and be something we could strategically advocate for.  The immediate question remains: how can we help our Waterbury chapter grow in their understanding and successfully advocate with their elected leaders.  And since a state legislator will be there, how could they work in a plug to give BESB and its budget attention.  I hope that I’ve provided a bit of clarity on the Federation’s position on accessible pedestrian signals—much in line with what many of us Federationists have been saying—and I hope it will guide our Waterbury chapter and any of us helping them to make their meeting a true success and build our Federation.

Best,

Nathanael

--

WHEREAS, the Public Rights-of-Way Access Advisory Committee (PROWAAC) of the Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board (ATBCB) issued a report called "Building a True Community" which proposed new standards and regulations to govern the building and rebuilding of public rights-of-way such as streets, sidewalks, and other outdoor public areas so that individuals with disabilities can access them; and

WHEREAS, this report contained recommendations regarding Accessible Pedestrian Signals (APSs), which are electronic devices that alert the blind pedestrian in an audible or vibrotactile manner when the traffic signal has changed so that it is safe to walk; and

WHEREAS, the report recommended that an APS shall be provided at any intersection where the timing of a pedestrian signal is altered by push button actuation and where the signal includes a leading pedestrian interval, a period of time during which the pedestrian is allowed to start crossing before vehicular traffic is allowed to move; and

WHEREAS, the report further recommended that APSs with an optional-use feature be installed at intersections where pedestrian crossing intervals are pretimed and not affected by the push of a button; and

WHEREAS, pursuant to resolutions adopted by this organization, the Federation submitted a minority report urging that the ATBCB mandate APSs in situations only where the built environment did not provide sufficient nonvisual clues for a blind pedestrian to know when it was safe to cross and that all APSs be vibrotactile so that unneeded and distracting noise not be emitted into intersections; and

WHEREAS, on June 17, 2002, the ATBCB published a draft guideline based on the PROWAAC report, essentially disregarding both the PROWAAC report and the Federation's recommendations and calling instead for APSs with locator tones to be installed at every intersection with a pedestrian signal; and

WHEREAS, the PROWAAC report proposed installing APS in an overly broad number of places but at least limited the installation to some degree and further provided for an optional activation feature, thereby giving each pedestrian the choice of using or not using the APS; and

WHEREAS, the board's draft guidelines will force installation and use of APSs at every signalized intersection in America while costing tax payers many billions of dollars; and

WHEREAS, at the majority of intersections the existing environment and traffic pattern provide sufficient nonvisual cues for blind persons to cross the street safely without APSs, and blind people do so every day: Now, therefore,

BE IT RESOLVED by the National Federation of the Blind in convention assembled this ninth day of July, 2002, in the City of Louisville, Kentucky, that this organization condemn and deplore the ATBCB's narrow-minded and uninformed view of blindness as expressed in the draft guideline proposing to require the installation of APSs at all signalized intersections in America; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this organization urge the ATBCB to reconsider and reject the extreme position taken on APSs in its June 17, 2002, draft guidelines and adopt a position on the placement and use of APSs that is more realistic and consistent with the prevailing view among the blind themselves.

From: CT-NFB [mailto:ct-nfb-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of stanley torow via CT-NFB
Sent: Saturday, November 26, 2016 10:55 AM
To: NFB of Connecticut Mailing List
Cc: stanley torow
Subject: Re: [Ct-nfb] [Ctabs] December Meeting of the Waterbury Area Chapter

Justin,
you are right with instruction in crossing streets. only main streets have audible signals. the side streets do not & we need to learn to cross them safely. i personally like the audible signals in town, but at home i need to know how to cross the side streets. if we have to choose, then instruction wins out.
Eileen Torow

On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 02:49 AM, Justin Salisbury via CT-NFB wrote:

Aloha, My Federation Ohana:

I am surprised by the responses I’m reading here. I feel like a lot of folks seem to feel the need to justify their own use of audible crossing signals. When we are having policy discussions, it is important to remember that we are talking about the governmental decisions about certain programs and resources; if we criticize a program or resource, we are not criticizing the people who choose to use it. If we advocate for the end of subminimum wages, we are not criticizing the people who choose to work for subminimum wages; we are saying that those people deserve better. When an orientation and mobility instructor, like me, abides by professional standards of safety with street crossing techniques, it is not a criticism of the individuals who choose to use them. 

We are currently lacking two things: proper mobility instruction and audible traffic signals at every lighted intersection. As an organization, we can choose to advocate for both, either one, or neither. Because the conversation is occurring, it is obvious that we are not interested in sitting out completely. Since the two contradict each other, advocating for both of them seems a bit inefficient. Thus, we are left with the decision of which one we want. 

Safety is my first concern because none of the rest of the discussion matters to a dead blind person. There are two primary safety concerns. First of all, not all cars obey the traffic lights. A blind traveler can react to the change in the light, but this does not necessarily mean that the cars are all acting according to the light. If drivers did not run red lights, then we would not have the common expression that I just used, “to run red lights.” Someone reacting to the light change is vulnerable to cars that do not obey the light cycle, and that is a risk. I suppose there is also even potential for the audible signal to malfunction, and my life is just too precious to risk with that. Second, the sound of the audible crossing signal interferes with a person’s ability to hear the traffic sounds which they should be using to make their crossing. It is harder to hear the traffic sounds when anything else is competing for the air waves. This reduces safety when crossing. 

There are a lot of well-meaning people who do not know the things I just mentioned and who maybe do not know how blind people travel safely and independently who might expect blind people to use the audible crossing signals to cross streets. This is dangerous. If there is no audible signal, then it will be more apparent that the blind traveler is to use something else, thus continuing the problem-solving process. If the problem-solving process is aborted because of the presence of an audible crossing signal, then the choice of street crossing technique will likely be one of compromised safety. 

I really appreciate Nathanael’s mentioning of where the money is going. In the National Federation of the Blind, we have to choose what our priorities are and where we ask society to spend money accommodating us. One such way is with the provision of orientation and mobility services to help us adapt to a system built around the needs of the sighted. Another means could be the provision of more audible crossing signals. The installation of these signals costs money, and there are a lot of lighted intersections in Connecticut. If our state spent that money there instead of on orientation and mobility services, then one mobility task would be addressed, and it would be addressed with compromised safety. If the state chose to spend money on orientation and mobility services, then blind people could become better travelers in any situation and not need audible crossing signals. 

As an organization, we can make the choice to advocate for better orientation and mobility services so that blind people can travel more safely, confidently, and independently in any situation. This would communicate a raised set of expectations for blind people, set more blind people free, and give the State of Connecticut a bigger bang for its buck. We could also choose to request that the state and local municipalities install audible crossing signals, perpetuating a lower set of expectations and anchoring ourselves to a method of street crossing which compromises our safety. 

The choice is ours. May we choose wisely.

Yours,

Justin M. Salisbury, MA, NOMC, NCRTB, NCUEB

Opportunity Ambassador

National Federation of the Blind

Email:  <mailto:President at Alumni.ECU.edu> President at Alumni.ECU.edu

LinkedIn:  <https://www.linkedin.com/in/justin-salisbury> https://www.linkedin.com/in/justin-salisbury  

“Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire.” 

William Butler Yeats

From: CT-NFB [ <mailto:ct-nfb-bounces at nfbnet.org> mailto:ct-nfb-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Mary Silverberg via CT-NFB
Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2016 8:31 AM
To: NFB of Connecticut Mailing List < <mailto:ct-nfb at nfbnet.org> ct-nfb at nfbnet.org>
Cc: Mary Silverberg < <mailto:marysilverfox at gmail.com> marysilverfox at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Ct-nfb] [Ctabs] December Meeting of the Waterbury Area Chapter

Esther,

Well stated. Yes, each of us uses a variety of coping mechanisms to deal with life's challenges. There should be room for all of them. Life is about choice and having options. 

Mary

On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 10:51 AM, Esther Levegnale via CT-NFB <ct-nfb at nfbnet.org> wrote:

Hi, All!

I would like to weigh in on the topic of audible signals.

I honestly felt they were a huge help to me, especially in an unfamiliar city where I wasn't sure how wide the street crossings were.  Also, at times I'm sure many of us have a tendency to veer a little bit and when the signal on the other side of a street is beeping, it helps to keep us on a straight path.

I think we need to have an open mind about this issue as many blind people don't have the dexterity it might take to cross a street and therefore, we can't use a boiler-plate type of attitude toward what blind people are capable or not capable of doing.  We, as with sighted people, have different ways to cope with situations and I know that the NFB frowns on audible signals and when the domes were placed on the edges of train platforms were an issue many years ago, the organization fought against them.  When I travel on trains, I find the domes most helpful, even though my cane skills are very good.

Anyway, that's my story and I'm stickin' to it.  I certainly don't mean to demean anyone for their opinions, but I'm just stating mine.  ☺️  Thanks and I hope everyone has a wonderful Thanksgiving holiday!

Esther

Sent From Esther's Amazing and Awesome iPhone 7+!

On Nov 21, 2016, at 7:20 PM, Mary Silverberg via CT-NFB <ct-nfb at nfbnet.org> wrote:

All,

As a partially sighted person, I rely on audible signals when crossing complex intersections. I do not view this as a crutch to dependancy. When  the Town of West Hartford began the installation of these signals when replacing older equipment, several of us with a variety of disabilities went out with the Town engineers and the installers to  optimize the volume with time of day and  length of time to cross. I welcome these signals in every larger city in which  I must navigate.

Mary Silverberg 

On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 6:07 PM, bob morrissey via CT-NFB <ct-nfb at nfbnet.org> wrote:

Hey Justin,

Why do you feel so opposed to audible cross walks?   Is it a dependency issue when the function is not working?

As a partially sighted person, I find an audible signal very helpful when crossing a busy intersection.

But, I'm open minded and willing to hear your thoughts.

Thanks.

Bob Morrissey

 <tel:203-272-3278> 203-272-3278

From: CT-NFB [mailto: <mailto:ct-nfb-bounces at nfbnet.org> ct-nfb-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Justin Salisbury via CT-NFB
Sent: Monday, November 21, 2016 4:42 PM
To: Connecticut Association of Blind Students
Cc: Justin Salisbury; ' <mailto:ct-nfb at nfbnet.org> ct-nfb at nfbnet.org'
Subject: Re: [Ct-nfb] [Ctabs] December Meeting of the Waterbury Area Chapter

Hi Lucia,

Thanks for sending this out! I’m so glad to see that our Waterbury Chapter is already speaking out against the custodialism that yields audible crosswalk signals. If we didn’t have the Waterbury Chapter working on this, Waterbury could become as bad as Honolulu, with audible crosswalk signals almost everywhere. It really gets in the way of teaching my students how to cross streets safely. I’m working on a research article for the orientation and mobility profession on exactly why the implementation of audible crosswalk signals are bad for blind people. It’s too bad that I haven’t published it already because it could be great support for the Chapter’s argument. 

Good luck, and please let me know how I can help!

Justin

Justin M. Salisbury, MA, NOMC, NCRTB, NCUEB

Opportunity Ambassador

National Federation of the Blind

Email:  <mailto:President at Alumni.ECU.edu> President at Alumni.ECU.edu

LinkedIn:  <https://www.linkedin.com/in/justin-salisbury> https://www.linkedin.com/in/justin-salisbury  

“Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire.” 

William Butler Yeats

From: Ctabs [ <mailto:ctabs-bounces at nfbnet.org> mailto:ctabs-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of llee--- via Ctabs
Sent: Monday, November 21, 2016 10:40 AM
To: NFB of CT list serve < <mailto:ct-nfb at nfbnet.org> ct-nfb at nfbnet.org>; CTABS List serv < <mailto:ctabs at nfbnet.org> ctabs at nfbnet.org>
Cc:  <mailto:llee at nfbct.org> llee at nfbct.org
Subject: [Ctabs] December Meeting of the Waterbury Area Chapter

Help Us Build Our Future

Attend Meetings of Our New Waterbury Chapter!

The National Federation of the Blind of Connecticut (NFB of CT) invites you to join our new Waterbury Chapter. We hold our meetings at the Silas Bronson Library, 267 Grand Street, on the Second Saturday of each month.

On December 10th, our meeting will concern audible crosswalk signals in the City of Waterbury. Our State Representative Gerry Reyes, several Aldermen and a City Engineer will attend our meeting to discuss this issue. Plan to attend this important meeting!

To learn that you are greater than what most sighted people believe they see, meet us at the Silas Bronson Library on Saturday December 10th from noon to 2:00 PM. 

For further questions, please contact Josefina Martinez at  <tel:203-578-6471> 203-578-6471, or call our community outreach office at  <tel:860-289-1971> 860-289-1971.

_______________________________________________
CT-NFB mailing list
CT-NFB at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/ct-nfb_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for CT-NFB:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/ct-nfb_nfbnet.org/marysilverfox%40gmail.com

_______________________________________________
CT-NFB mailing list
CT-NFB at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/ct-nfb_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for CT-NFB:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/ct-nfb_nfbnet.org/elevegnale%40sbcglobal.net

_______________________________________________
CT-NFB mailing list
CT-NFB at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/ct-nfb_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for CT-NFB:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/ct-nfb_nfbnet.org/marysilverfox%40gmail.com

  _____  

_______________________________________________
CT-NFB mailing list
 <mailto:CT-NFB at nfbnet.org> CT-NFB at nfbnet.org
 <http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/ct-nfb_nfbnet.org> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/ct-nfb_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for CT-NFB:
 <http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/ct-nfb_nfbnet.org/setorow%40optonline.net> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/ct-nfb_nfbnet.org/setorow%40optonline.net

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/ctabs_nfbnet.org/attachments/20161126/8e6c7873/attachment.html>