[nfbmi-talk] one aps primer
joe harcz Comcast
joeharcz at comcast.net
Tue Aug 27 12:10:41 UTC 2013
Hi Chris and All,
The issue of appropriately designed APS versus appropriate instruction in
travel is not a zero sum game anymore than is the requirement for raised
character and Braille signage on permanent rooms is so. In other words we
can and should have both.
The sighted world takes information delivery (i.e. ped signals and signs)
for granted and does not feel diminished one with.
Now I'm not talking about having an aps on every corner here, but am talking
about equivalency. And where there is a ped signal it can, and should be
accessible to all including, we the blind.
I've been very passionate about these issues, as all know for years, for to
me it is a matter, again of civil and equal rights; equal protection under
law.
Now, that said there is not now, nor has there ever been from me an argument
that the cuckoos are not just cuckoo. They don't offer equivalency. They are
annoying. And they simply often are not helpful either.
Plus they kind of make us look silly.
Whoever invented them didn't do proponents of aps any favors for sure.
Nor, again do I disagree what you and Doug h have written on travel, etc.
Another reason for aps though has been stated upon this list for as we all
age often hearing and other innate mobility tools begin to break down.
One of my old colleagues from New Hampshire was the best cane traveler I
ever knew and a true mentor to me with his independence. A long time
Federationist he was also a long time proponent for appropriate aps because
he was losing his hearing abilities, or at least had some age related loss
and he also dealt with the elderly blind on a daily basis.
Thus our New Hampshire NFB delegation always worked in favor of aps,
including at NFB conventions in the late nineties.
Again though it isn't a matter of one or the other, but, rather both in my
mind.
When it comes to specific crossings I must examine them. But, again look at
the issue of room labeling, or lack thereof for blind folks. If sighted
folks in a hotel or school or state building get to know at first instance
what the room is then why not us?
And grinning here, I would not wish for the room to be labeled with a cuckoo
sound, but rather with raised character and Braille signage that says
precisely what it says to the sighted.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Christine Boone" <christineboone2 at gmail.com>
To: "NFB of Michigan Internet Mailing List" <nfbmi-talk at nfbnet.org>
Cc: <nfbmi-talk at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Monday, August 26, 2013 1:17 PM
Subject: Re: [nfbmi-talk] one aps primer
> Those signals described here by Joe are by far the most effective and
> least intrusive kinds of accessible pedestrian signals.
>
> Boone Christine Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Aug 26, 2013, at 5:36 AM, "joe harcz Comcast" <joeharcz at comcast.net>
> wrote:
>
>> Accessible Pedestrian Signals
>> Authors: Lloyd Rue and Janet Barlow
>> Untitled-96-425APS_P1070847_croppedC:\Users\lloyd.rue\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary
>> Internet Files\Content.Word\P1080327_cropped.jpg Description
>> Accessible pedestrian signals (APS) provide audible and/or vibrotactile
>> information
>> coincident with visual pedestrian indications. Loud audible tones during
>> the walk interval
>> from across the street (such as the commonly used cuckoo-cheep speakers
>> mounted
>> on the pedestrian signal head) are not necessary, or useful, in most
>> situations. New
>> types of APS, now required for U.S. installations, provide the audible
>> WALK indication
>> from a speaker located at the pushbutton, at a volume audible
>> only six to twelve feet from the pushbutton. Installing the APS
>> devices in separated locations on each corner, near each
>> crosswalk line furthest from the center of the intersection,
>> assists in determining which signal is sounding. The audible
>> indication is either a rapid ticking sound or a speech message;
>> a tactile arrow also vibrates during the WALK indication. The
>> audible and vibrotactile signals let pedestrians know,
>> particularly those with vision impairments or vision and hearing
>> impairments, when the walk interval begins. An additional quiet
>> tone, a pushbutton locator tone, repeats continuously once per
>> second during flashing and steady DON’T WALK to assist
>> pedestrians who are blind in knowing that there is a pushbutton
>> and in locating the push button. The APS device also includes
>> a tactile arrow aligned with the direction of travel on the crosswalk to
>> provide directional
>> information. APS can also provide a customized speech message identifying
>> the street
>> or crossing or additional information about signalization or geometry of
>> the intersection.
>> Courtesy of Janet Barlow
>> Benefits
>> APS can provide information to pedestrians about the presence and
>> location of a
>> pushbutton. The audible information provides unambiguous information
>> about the
>> WALK indication and which crossing is being signaled, if installed
>> properly, to those who
>> are unable to see the WALK.
>> Considerations
>> Volume of APS should be carefully adjusted and controlled. APS that
>> automatically
>> adjust in response to ambient sound levels are now required by the MUTCD
>> when APS
>> are installed. If not adjusted properly, sounds produced by APS may
>> disturb neighbors
>> and prevent pedestrians who are visually impaired from hearing the
>> traffic sounds,
>> which they need to hear in addition to the APS.
>> See Accessible Pedestrian Signals: A Guide to Best Practices1 at
>> www.apsguide.org provides extensive information on uses of APS by
>> pedestrians who are blind or visually
>> impaired, a tool for prioritizing installation locations, and information
>> on various features
>> of APS including audible beaconing,. Audible beaconing refers to
>> providing a louder signal from the opposite side of the street to provide
>> directional information. Audible
>> beaconing should be used only where necessary; Additional research on
>> audible
>> beaconing is ongoing.2, 3 . Careful installation is also very important
>> to proper
>> functioning of the devices. In addition to the APS guide, Common Problems
>> arising in
>> the installation of Accessible Pedestrian Signals4 provides installation
>> information and
>> guidance.
>> The 2009 Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD)5 includes
>> standards and
>> guidance for APS and APS detector (pushbutton) placement in sections
>> 4E.09 through
>> 4E.13 Section 4E.08 provides new standards and guidance on the placement
>> of all
>> pedestrian detectors, and figures 4E-3 and 4E-4 show typical pushbutton
>> locations.
>> On July 26, 2011, the U.S. Access Board released for public comment
>> proposed
>> guidelines for accessible public rights-of-way, Proposed Accessibility
>> Guidelines for
>> Pedestrian Facilities in the Public Right-of-Way.6 As indicated in the
>> preamble to the
>> notice of proposed rule, the guidelines provide design criteria for
>> public streets and
>> sidewalks, including pedestrian access routes, street crossings, curb
>> ramps and
>> blended transitions, on-street parking, street furniture, and other
>> elements. The
>> specifications comprehensively address access that accommodates all types
>> of
>> disabilities, including mobility and vision impairments, while taking
>> into account
>> conditions and constraints that may impact compliance, such as space
>> limitations and
>> terrain.
>> The guidelines, once finalized and implemented as standards, will apply
>> to newly
>> constructed or altered portions of public rights-of-way covered by the
>> Americans with
>> Disabilities Act (ADA). They will also apply to public rights-of-way
>> built or altered with
>> funding from the Federal government under the Architectural Barriers Act
>> (ABA) and the
>> Rehabilitation Act. Existing pedestrian networks not undergoing
>> alteration will not be
>> required to meet these requirements. The rights-of-way guidelines
>> complement, and in
>> some areas, reference the Board's ADA and ABA Accessibility Guidelines
>> for buildings
>> and facilities.
>> These guidelines and additional information can be found at
>> www.access-board.gov under Public Rights-of-Way. Portions of the
>> applicable standard are shown below:6 R209 Accessible Pedestrian Signals
>> and Pedestrian Pushbuttons
>> R209.1 General. Where pedestrian signals are provided at pedestrian
>> street
>> crossings, they shall include accessible pedestrian signals and
>> pedestrian
>> pushbuttons complying with sections 4E.08 through 4E.13 of the MUTCD
>> (incorporated by reference, see R104.2). Operable parts shall comply with
>> R403.
>> Advisory R209 Accessible Pedestrian Signals and Pedestrian Pushbuttons.
>> An accessible pedestrian signal and pedestrian pushbutton is an
>> integrated
>> device that communicates information about the WALK and DON’T WALK
>> intervals at signalized intersections in non-visual formats (i.e.,
>> audible tones and
>> vibrotactile surfaces) to pedestrians who are blind or have low vision.
>> R209.2 Alterations. Existing pedestrian signals shall comply with R209.1
>> when
>> the signal controller and software are altered, or the signal head is
>> replaced.
>> Required language for speech WALK messages and pushbutton information
>> messages
>> is provided in the MUTCD. Some of the research that led to those
>> requirements can be
>> found in an Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Journal article.7
>> Early Adopters/Case Studies
>> From APS: A guide to best practice1, with updated information for this
>> report.
>> 1. Portland, Oregon
>> a. Portland began installing APS in late 1970s.8
>> b. As of December 2011, APS have been installed at 148 intersections;
>> that
>> amounts to more than 35% of the total intersection locations with
>> pedestrian detection. 75 of those are equipped with the new APS with
>> push button locater tones.
>> 2. Maryland Department of Transportation9
>> a. Maryland is installing pushbutton-integrated APS at all intersections
>> with
>> pedestrian signals by 2015. APS are installed during construction or
>> reconstruction of intersections. A prioritization checklist is used to
>> rate
>> intersections where APS are requested (when no construction is planned
>> at that location).
>> b. 394 APS projects were completed by January 2009; design was underway
>> for approximately 450 more intersections.
>> 3. Charlotte, North Carolina
>> a. Installations began in the year 1999
>> b. APS have been installed at 59 intersections, as of December 2011, with
>> 15 more planned in the succeeding six-month period.
>> 4. San Francisco, California
>> a. As a result of a negotiated agreement with the California Council of
>> the
>> Blind, in June 2007, San Francisco committed to install accessible
>> pedestrian signals at no fewer than 80 intersections over the next two
>> and
>> a half years. As of December 2011, 125 intersection installations have
>> been completed.
>> Cost to implement
>> $1000 to $10,000 estimated per crosswalk (2009 estimates), as a feature
>> added to an
>> existing intersection not equipped with APS. The variability in the
>> estimated cost to
>> implement is due to the variations in the amount of electrical or
>> construction work
>> needed to place devices and pushbutton poles in appropriate locations.
>> However, if the
>> 2009 MUTCD guidance for location of all pushbutton poles is followed,
>> pushbuttons will
>> be in the proper location for APS installation, so the costs should be
>> lower. APS
>> devices average $600. per device.
>> Illustrations
>> Audible and vibrotactile pushbuttons,
>> ref. 1
>> Optimal location of pushbutton-integrated APS, ref. 1
>> Photos courtesy of Janet Barlow, Accessible Design for the Blind,
>> Asheville, NC
>> References
>> 1. Harkey, D.L., Carter, D.L., Barlow, J.M. & Bentzen, B.L. Accessible
>> pedestrian
>> signals: A guide to best practice. National Cooperative Highway Research
>> Program Web-Only Document 150, Washington, DC: National Cooperative
>> Highway Research Program. (2007) www.apsguide.org
>> 2. Harkey, D.L., Carter, D.L., Barlow, J.M., Bentzen, B.L., Myers, L. &
>> Scott, A.
>> Guidelines for accessible pedestrian signals final report. Contractor’s
>> Final
>> Report for NCHRP Project 3-62, National Cooperative Highway Research
>> Program Web-Only Document 117B, Washington, DC: National Cooperative
>> Highway Research Program. (2007)
>> 3. Barlow, J.M., Scott, A.C., Bentzen, B.L. Audible Beaconing with
>> Accessible
>> Pedestrian Signals. AER Journal: Research and Practice in Visual
>> Impairment
>> and Blindness, Vol. 2, Number 4, (2009): 149 – 158. [NIHMS167632]
>> 4. Barlow, J.M. Common problems arising in the installation of accessible
>> pedestrian signals. U.S. Access Board, Washington, D.C., (2009)
>> http://access-
>> board.gov/research/pedestrian-signals/bulletin.htm
>> 5. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration.
>> Manual on
>> Uniform Traffic Control Devices, 2009 Edition. ATSSA/ITE/AASHTO (2010).
>> http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/. 6. U.S. Access Board. Proposed Accessibility
>> Guidelines for Pedestrian Facilities in
>> the Public Right-of-Way. Washington, D.C.: Architectural and
>> Transportation
>> Barriers Compliance Board. (2011). http://www.access-
>> board.gov/prowac/nprm.pdf 7. Bentzen, B.L., Barlow, J.M. and Franck, L.
>> Speech Messages for Accessible
>> Pedestrian Signals. ITE Journal, 74-9, (2004): 20-24.
>> 8. Kloos, B. Briefing Paper on Intersection Traffic Control Wayfinding
>> Cues at
>> Intersections Workshop; accessed December 2011
>> http://www.ite.org/accessible/curbramp/Kloos_%20Briefing.pdf 9. Maryland
>> State Highway Administration. Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
>> Quarterly Report to FHWA (January 2009); accessed December 2011
>> http://www.sha.maryland.gov/opr/FHWA_Report_Jan_09_FINAL.pdf. Related
>> Publications:
>> Ashmead, D.H., Wall, R.S., Bentzen, B.L., & Barlow, J. M. Which
>> crosswalk? Effects of
>> accessible pedestrian signal characteristics. ITE Journal, 74-9, (2004):
>> 26-31:
>> Barlow, J.M., & Franck, L. Crossroads: Modern interactive intersections
>> and accessible
>> pedestrian signals. Journal of Visual Impairment and Blindness. Vol 99,
>> (10), (2005):
>> 599-610.
>> Barlow, J.M., Bentzen, B.L. & Bond, T. Blind pedestrians and the changing
>> technology and
>> geometry of signalized intersections: Safety, orientation and
>> independence. Journal of
>> Visual Impairment and Blindness. Vol. 99:10, (2005): 587-598.
>> Barlow, J. M. Common Problems Arising in the Installation of Accessible
>> Pedestrian Signals.
>> Washington, DC: U.S. Access Board, (2009).
>> Bentzen, B.L., Barlow, J.M. & Bond, T. Challenges of Unfamiliar
>> Signalized
>> Intersections for Pedestrians who are Blind: Research on Safety.
>> Transportation
>> Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 1878,
>> (2004):
>> 51 -57.
>> Bentzen, B.L., Scott, A.C., & Barlow, J.M. Accessible pedestrian signals:
>> Effect of device
>> features. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation
>> Research
>> Board, No. 1982. (2006): 30-37.
>> Carter, D.L., Harkey, D.L., Bentzen, B.L., & Barlow, J.M. Development of
>> an intersection
>> prioritization tool for accessible pedestrian signal installation.
>> Transportation Research
>> Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1982, (2006):
>> 13-20.
>> Marston, J.R. and Golledge, R.G. Towards an accessible city: Removing
>> functional
>> barriers for the blind and vision impaired: A Case for Auditory Signs.
>> Final
>> Report. University of California Berkeley: University of California
>> Transportation
>> Center. (2000)
>> Noyce, D.A. and Barlow, J.M. Interfacing Accessible Pedestrian Signals
>> with Traffic
>> Signal Control Equipment. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Access Board. (2003)
>> Accessed at www.access-board.gov
>> Noyce, D.A., Gates, T.J. & Barlow, J.M. Pedestrian and bicyclist safety
>> at intersections, In
>> Toolbox on intersection safety and design. Washington, DC: Institute of
>> Transportation
>> Engineers, (2004).
>> Scott, A.C., Barlow, J. M., Bentzen, B.L., Bond, T.L.Y. & Gubbe, D.
>> Accessible pedestrian
>> signals at complex intersections: Effects on blind pedestrians.
>> Transportation Research
>> Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 2073, (2008):
>> 94–103.
>> Scott, A.C., Myers, L., Barlow, J.M., and Bentzen, B.L. Accessible
>> pedestrian signals:
>> The effect of pushbutton location and audible WALK indications on
>> pedestrian
>> behavior. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation
>> Research Board, No. 1939, (2006): 69-76.
>> Wall, R.S., Ashmead, D.H., Bentzen, B.L., & Barlow, J. Directional
>> guidance from
>> audible pedestrian signals for street crossing. Ergonomics. (2004): Vol.
>> 47, (12),
>> 1318 – 1338.
>> Williams, M., Van Houten, R., Blasch, B., Ferraro, J. Field comparison of
>> two types of
>> accessible pedestrian signals. Transportation Research Record: Journal of
>> the
>> Transportation Research Board, No. 1939, (2005): 91-98.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> nfbmi-talk mailing list
>> nfbmi-talk at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbmi-talk_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> nfbmi-talk:
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbmi-talk_nfbnet.org/christineboone2%40gmail.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> nfbmi-talk mailing list
> nfbmi-talk at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbmi-talk_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> nfbmi-talk:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbmi-talk_nfbnet.org/joeharcz%40comcast.net
>
More information about the NFBMI-Talk
mailing list