Loading...
02-04-1992 - Audible Pedestrain Signals• City of West Covina Memorandum To City Nanager and City Council FROM Human Services Department AGENDA ITEM NO. E2_r suBJECr. AUDIBLE PEDESTRIAN SIGNALS DATE February 4, 1992 SUMMARY The yHuman Services Commission has reviewed a reduest from the National Federation of the Blind to remove the audible pedestrian signals in the City. ur.urprn!^!n The City. Council at their meeting of Auqust 26, 1901 referred a letter to the Human Services Commission from Mr. Cantos, Field Representative of the National Federation of the Blind, expressing their opposition to audible pedestrian signals. (Letter attached) Mr. Cantos indicates in his letter that audible signals should be removed for the following reasons: 1. They foster the misconception that the blind are not capable of independent travel aithout the aid of technology or other alterations to the environment, and this misconception will often lead potential employers in the competitive labor market to reject qualified blind applicants simply because they are blind, such resulting from equating blindness with helplessness and incompetence. 2. They do not provide information that is already available to the blind 41y the use of other senses, and they impair the ability of the blind to judge for themselves when it is safe to cross, both when traffic is orderly and when drivers disobey traffic lights. 3. They create a false sense of independence for those who use them, and they do nothing but perpetuate dependence on a device which is not always reliable even if they were never to break down or,malfunction in any !•ray. . In 1980 the ,City Council of West Covina formed a committee of staff and citizens to determine the types of architectural barriers that could be removed to make the City barrier free. Funding for improvements. was available from the Community Development Block Grant. The San Gabriel. Valley Center for Independent Living was represented on the committee and an, active supporter of the many barriers that have been removed throughout the City: The Committee began installation of the audible devices at three locations. Since that time 23 locations have the audible signals in the City. ;'lost locations are in business areas, not in residential intersections. The signals are activated when a person pushes the signal button and the walk sign is displayed. The devices are generally maintenance free and currently cost about $300 each. ANALYSIS The letter from Mr. Cantos requests removal of these devices due to the high cost of maintenance, that the blind do not need them, and that they convey a wrong picture of the blind and their dependency on these devices. The letter also notes that the devices also qive a false sense of security, since the blind person can no longer hear the oncoming traffic to guide him when to cross the street. Since lORl no unit has failed during normal operations of the signal. Three units have been vandalized and were replaced. The cost of operation and the maintenance is the few cents of energy use. The position that the blind do not need these devices is that of the National Federation of the Blind. Other orqanizations, such as the California Council of the Blind, the American Council of the Blind, and Center for Independent Living support the use of audible signals. The devices are used all over the United States, Japan, Canada, Australia, Great Britain, and other European Countries. A position paper (attached) of the California Council of the Blind states the following: "The ability of blind and visually impaired persons to travel safely and independently is a crucial element in many aspects of their daily lives. Although most blind people have this ability, and have the right to use pedestrian intersections whether signalized or not, audible signals, by allowing a blind or visually impaired pedestrian to know when a "walk" signal begins and ends, can greatly enhance this ability. Therefore, the California Council for the Blind, (CCB) strongly supports the utilization of audible traffic signals." ALTERNATIVES 1. Agree to the position taken by the National Federation of the Blind and remove all the audible signals in the City. This alternative is the most expensive and labor intensive (about two intersections per day for removal). 2. Leave the present devices and do not install any future devices. 3. Leave present devices in place and install future devices only at the .request of an individual blind person or blind organization. 4. Continue to install devices when funding is available, until all non-residential intersections are served. FUNDING Community Development Block Grant Funds can be used to pay for these devices. The Human Services Commission did not agree with the position of the National Federation of the Blind (meeting of November 12, 1991), but agrees with the position taken by the California Council of the Blind and the San Gabriel Valley Center for Independent Living. Over the years we have received comments from blind residents that support their installation. This is the first time we have heard opposition to the audible signals. Some of the comments have come from senior citizens that are alerted to the "walk" signal by the audible sound. In many instances it helps children that may be distracted when it is time to cross. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council maintain the current audible signals and install new ones at appropriate locations when funding is available. Gus Salazar Human Services Director 28/004 jmg • 1420 Queen Summit Dr: West Covina, CA 91791 July 26, 1991 The Honorable Richard Jennings, Mayor City of West Covina P. O. Box 1440 West Covina, CA 91793 Dear.Mayor Jennings: My name is Olegario D. Cantos, VII. Being blind all my, life, I have been a resident of West Covina since 1975. I am writing.in opposition to the continued maintenance and additional installation of audible traffic signals in the City of West Covina. For the reasons that I'will indicate below, they are of great harm to the blind in more ways than one, and they must all therefore be removed. Am I alone in holding the beliefs that I do? Not in the least. For the past year, I have been an active member.'of the National Federation of the Blind, the.voice of the organized blind in the United States. Numbering in the tens of thousands (at least 50;000 strong), .we have affiliates in every state (and the District of Columbia) and chapters in every major city in the country. For more than half a century, -we as members of the blindness community have come together to collectively speak for the blind. We strive to improve economic security, social and political equality, and employment opportunity for the blind. Such entails tearing down false stereotypes about the blind, working to assist the blind in seeking competitive employment, and otherwise showing society that we are equal in every. way except in not having the physical ability to see. Reflective of society as a whole, our members come from all walks of life. Such includes but is not limited to blind doctors, lawyers, teachers (incidentally, of sighted children), homemakers; horse ranchers, biologists, psychologists, college professors, biochemists, self-employed businesspersons, and elected officials. Our philosophy is that it is respectable to be blind and that the obstacles that prevent us from full participation in society do, not emerge from blindness itself but -rather from what people THINK about blindness. We know from first-hand experience that the blind can compete with the sighted on terms of full equality when given the proper training in basic skills and the opportunity to succeed. Our drive and determination lie behind the assertion that issues -ranging from employment to social acceptance and equal treatment are interlinked and must therefore be addressed individually while keeping in perspective their significance in a broader context. Our elected leaders'- constituency spans the nation and exists in the largest cities and in the smallest towns, and we work with government at all levels, the -courts, entities both in the public and private sector, and with individual members of the community to improve the lives of the blind and to eliminate all misconceptions about the blind. The Honorable Richard Jennings July 2.6 ,.., 1991 Page 2 Mayor Jennings, I am well aware of the good intention behind the installation of the audible, traf f ic signals; namely, to foster independence among the blind in everyday travel. Indeed, I recognize that the project was well intended. However, a high price is paid. Not only are the signals expensive to maintain due to frequent' mechanical failure, but the blind also pay a heavy price. . The public is led to believe that we are in need of physical alterations to the environment in order to function .as efficiently as the sighted. This is not.the case. In fact; we can travel independently in the world as it already exists without the - aid .of, technology, and we have been doing so for. many years. By listening to the flow of traffic, we can determine when it is safe to -.cross -a given street or.intersection. The presence --of audible traffic signals impairs our ability to listen to traffic and to judge* for ourselves when it is appropriate to cross. All too often, the general public holds false notions about blindness and what it means to be"blind. Contrary to popular belief, we do have the ability to. travel independently without- alteration to the environment. .Unlike.those in<wheelchairs, we'do not need special public accommodations to function. The solution to fulfilling the spirit. of the Americans with, Disabilities Act -is to create and .maintain'standards, policies, practices, and procedures in such a way that the abilities -possessed by persons with disabilities are used .to their rightful, potential. Through proper training, the blind can travel .as independently as the sighted without the ..presence of audible traffic signals. If the''general public continues to reinforce the misconception that the blind need.special devices to undertake. -such a simple task as crossing the street, how does this reflect on' the perceived abilities of the blind? Employers, being part of the general public, will embody.the same misconceptions as the rest of society, and many of them will (and do) discriminate against us because of such -falsities. As a result, numerous documented cases occur in which employers in the competitive labor market refuse. to hire someone. simply because of blindness and not for reasons of qualifications which are clearly possessed and demonstrated by the blind person in question. If there are any doubts.of.this truth, one need only think. about personal beliefs about,the abilities of the blind and about -the vision of the helpless and incompetent blind,person which is often conjured up when thinking of the blind. Everyone., including the blind ourselves, has had negative images'at one.point or another; but,. the key is to move beyond the negative stereotypes and to realize the abilities of the blind as .equal citizens. Unfortunately, the audible signals are one of the ways in which _stereotypes are reinforced, and ridding our city of such devices will contribute to the gradual process of .changing society's attitudes about the blind. Change must take place in all aspects of life, and this is one such facet. v The Honorable Richard Jennings July 26, 1991 Page 3 The fact is that buzzers and bird calls do not solve any problems or truly promote the.independence'of the blind.' In lieu of this assertion, I wish to illustrate a scenario which parallels the elements contained in the question of audible traffic signals. It -deals with the existence.of'a problem,'we11-intentioned efforts to solve that problem, and the consequences that -come about as a result of decided courses of action. ' It also illustrates the approach.of the National Federation of the Blind, namely to solve problems by eliminating their'causes. Here is the illustration: it is vitally important for people to be literate in order that they may contribute productively'to society and function in daily life. By.logic, the way to,combat illiteracy is to teach people how to be literate. If people cannot read, the solution is not to provide federal, state, or even local funding'to pay for full time or, even, part time readers to enunciate to them every written word necessary simply to.undertake the business and pleasure of everyday living such as reading newspapers,' magazines, books of all sorts, pamphlets, mail, menus at restaurants, street signs,. instructions. for) putting together, items where assembly is required,. etc. Rather, the more practical and appropriate solution is to teach the illiterate how to read and comprehend written material. Only in doing so can independence.accurately be referred to as such. Of course, for.the sake of argument., readers can be provided for illiterate individuals, and this can be "foster'ing independence" so-called, After all, they will have functioned (with the assistance of these persons) as well as the literate. But, as we know, the money. set -aside to combat literacy can be put' to much better use: It can be invested toward the initiation and eventual expansion,of literacy programs across the country, for example. In so doing, government is getting to the heart of the matter and solving the problem at its source. Please examine the illustration with the greatest -degree of care.' As indicated previously, the.el-ements'are all there: the problem (illiteracy), well-intentioned solutions (either paying for readers or teaching people how to read), and the respective results (" cosmetic" independence or true independence) . Inherent in all of this are two,dametrically opposing philosophies.. -By holding one view, one cannot necessarily hold the other. In figurative terms, they are the "GIVE-a-person-a-fish"'philosophy and the "TEACH -a - person -HOW -to -fish" philosophy. The intention to provide funding for readers to the illiterate is to promote societal integration and personal productivity. (After all, with readers, the illiterate can function as well as the literate.) But, notice that the fundamental problem still remains unsolved. The illiterate still cannot read.. Hence, it stands to reason that the best way to .bring the..problem to final resolution is through empowerment, the act or series of acts which enable people to reach their goals The Honorable Richard Jennings July.26, 1991 C. Page 4- and/or-to achieve their maximum potential as a result of effort which originates from within as .a result of: inherent "ability.. Applying this to the blind in reference to..audibletraffic signals, can the blind be self-sufficient in.travel'without the aid of this technology? Yes,. indeed. Remember that it is not .blindness itself that' is -.,the obstacle .to progress but rather. what people THINK rabout -blindness. and the; abilities of blind people. Even if the City, should.; decide to continue the "GIVE -a-person-a-fish" approach; there' is yet another key, factor to consider, that of safety. It .is this issue which I.wish to confront next. Audible traffic signals are: not always reliable', ;.:even -*.if .'they t are fully,functional and.operational.1001 of -the-time (which. -Is never the case) You.. as a sighted person are well aware that traffic . signals., -do' -'not necessarily dictate the actions of. many* drivers.. They :may often recklessly continue on their way without regard for the traffic light -or the -safety of those: on the°street. .As such; they put , the. safety of all .,.pedestrians in j eopardy. 'Pedestrians who visually observe. an oncoming_ vehicle ignore a red light in perpendicular.`traffic can refrain fromobeying.theltraffic,signal in parallel traffic which signals.them to cross. However, we,' the blind, are at a disadvantage in this way, since the audible signals would hinder our ability to listen, carefully.to.traffic and do not tell us when drivers disobey traffic -Tights We are placed in 'a literal life-threatening,situation every time we either depend on or are forced, to .listen to them to tell us when it is safe to cross:. The argument sometimes made here is that --people donot always run..red lights, and that most people -are careful when seeing. blind pedestrians (or any other pedestrians, -for that' matter). But, is' it not" better•"to prevent unnecessary- accidents from happening -in the first place? If sole reliance _'ds based 'on the audible -signal we may be injured -,(or,,- perhaps, killed) in: -an automobile accident while crossing the street.. However, if we. are left' to .judge for ourselves without. the interference of audible. signals, the sound of an approaching vehicle will be* heard, and we will know not to cross the street until the danger _has. passed. Unfortunately, , the prevailing '.myth is that audible - traffic signals' will assist the blind. when, in fact, they do not provide in'nformation , that is not already available to us by means of our other'senses. In light of all the aforementioned, logic need only be applied in-realizing"the danger that is posed to blind persons who depend.on audible signals. There is still another reason for expunging 'the signals from our city. Should blind persons ever decide to travel outside the City of West ' Covina ' (and, of course, most do at one time' or another,' including- myself) they will not -be able -to move about freely, without the assistance of others, since they will have become 'so The Honorable Richard Jennings July 26, 1991 Page 5 accustomed to reliance on the signals. Ultimately, then, has the problem been solved? Not really. A short term solution (which is not even safe in itself) will have been opted over the long term benefit of promoting -complete independence of the blind in daily travel. In effect, "the fish will have been given, but the lesson of fishing will not have been taught". The signals would have perpetuated the .problem. To reiterate, blindness is not a hinderance to self sufficiency in the environment as it existed before the installation of the signals. Additionally, their continued presence in our city will only compound the problem even further. The.issue of mobility training -may be thought to be of irrelevant concern to the topic at hand. For those who make such.a claim, I beg to differ. The "bottom line" is the use of financial resources at the disposal of our city government. These resources are finite -and, thus, very precious. I urge that they be put to better use by directing them toward providing competent training in the proper use of the long white cane, listening to the flow and direction of traffic, and other related skills. Our valuable tax dollars should not be devoted to endeavors which do not actually bring about long term consequences of great beneficial significance to the blind and, subsequently, to'society as a whole. Do -not waste valuable financial resources on unneeded projects such as the maintenance of the audible traffic signals already in place and the possible installation of similar devices where they do not currently exist. Please understand that the National Federation of the Blind is not against.the use of ALL technology, nor does it deny the fact that its members are blind. In fact, many of us use computers with speech output, talking clocks, Braille watches, and such like, and we are not ashamed of,ourblindness. Knowing within our hearts and minds that it is respectable to be blind, we openly and proudly carry long white canes and use dog guides, and we promote Braille literacy for persons who. are either totally blind or otherwise functionally illiterate in reading and writing print due to vision which causes inefficiency in the speed .and duration of such activities as compared to the sighted. In summary, the audible traffic signals should be removed for the following reasons: 1. They foster the misconception that the blind are not capable of independent travel without the aid of technology or other alterations to the environment, and this misconception will often lead potential employers in the competitive labor' market to reject qualified blind applicants simply because they are blind, such resulting The Honorable Richard Jennings July 26, 1991 ` Page 6 ; from , equating blindness with helplessness.- and incompetence. 2. They do not provide information that is already available to the blind by the use of other senses, and they impair the ability of the blind to judge ;tor themselves when' it is safe to cross, both when traffic is orderly_and_when drivers disobey traffic lights. 3.They create a false sense of independence for. those who use them, and they do nothing but perpetuate dependence on a. device which is not always reliable EVEN if they were never to.break down or malfunction in any way. I wanted to:bring to your attention the reasons behind the position of the National Federation of the Blind not simply to heighten awareness but also to insight action. As a resident 'of West Covina,' 'I am seeking .your support in this regard so that my welfare. as,well as .that of other blind citizen may be protected; and, as a .part of a larger movement, I am asking you to join our cause to champion the rights -of the blind. and to assist us in continuing to make full and equal participation in society a reality. During the -entire.step of the way, the National Federation.of the Blind will ;be there to work in partnership with you to advance .the City Is -.commitment of being'a model for other cities.to-follow. I am very confident that the time I have taken to.prepare my remarks will not be in'vain.. I am positive about your open-mindedness,. and I know that removal of the audible signals by appropriate action from the City Council is a definite possibility.. For your reference, you will find the following literature enclosed: * "What is the National Federation of the Blind" .* "About the National Federation of the Blind of California" * "Blindness.: Concepts and Misconceptions" by Dr. Kenneth Jernigan, Executive. Director and, President -Emeritus of the National Federation of the Blind * "Who is Blind and Is It Respectable!'- by Dr. Kenneth Jernigan "Audible Traffic Signals -are Barriers•to the Blind" by Gary Mackenstadt, Treasurer and President -Emeritus of the National Federation of the Blind of Washington (Includes Resolution 82-19, a policy position. of the National Federation of the.Blind on the issue of audible traffic signals) City by city, the National Federation of the Blind is working for the. removal of all, audible traffic signals. This is only a small The Honorable Richard Jennings July 26, 1991 Page 7 part of our constant and tireless efforts -toward the improvement of the lives of all blind people. It is with great eagerness that I look forward to your reply. At your earliest possible convenience, I would like to discuss with you the matter at hand as well as other issues of .importance to the blind. I am sure that our dialogue will result in the fulfillment of the mutual goal of making our city a better place in which to live.. As John Maxwell once said, "If there's hope in the future, there's power in the present." With your leadership, we can work together in the present to make the future that much brighter! Sincerely, Olegatio D. Cantos, VII, National Field Representative NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND CC.* Mr. David Nelson, Traffic Engineer CITY OF WEST COVINA Esteemed Members of the City Council CITY OF WEST COVINA Ms. Sharon Gold, President NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND OF CALIFORNIA Mr. Marc Maurer, President NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND Enclosures �V AUDIBLE TRAFFIC SIGNALS A Position Paper of the California Council of the Blind The ability of blind and visually impaired persons to travel safely and independently is a crucial element in many aspects of their daily lives. Although most blind people have this ability, and have the right to use pedistration intersections whether signalized or not, audible traffic signals,. by allowing a blind or visually impaired pedestrian to know when a "walk" signal begins and ends, can greatly enhance this ability. Therefore, the California Council of the Blind, (CCB), strongly supports the utilization of audible traffic signals. Since fiscal and other_ considerations require the use of criteria for determining when audible signal installation is mcst appropriate, priority guidelines should be established. The City of San Diego and the California Department of Transportation have both adopted guidelines which are, in most respects, reasonable. Consumer input, however, is the most effective mode of local planning. Blind and visually impaired citizens are best able to judge which installations will be most useful. We encourage communities to utilize the local affiliates of the COB in establishing installation guidelines. We encourage the use of push button activated audible signals. Pedestrian activation of audible signals enhances orientation of blind and visually impaired pedestrians through reduction of ambiguity which may arise due to constant operation of the signals. Audible signals activated only by those pedestrian who choose to use them would reduce their environmental impact. In circumstances where the use of push buttons is not feasible, however, automatic audible signals should be utilized when they can substantially improve safety and mobility. Easy access to push buttons is essential in ensuring that traffic signals, both audible and visual, can be utilized by blind and visually impaired persons. "The COB believes that the state should adopt standards fcr the location of push buttons. Continued technological advances will increase the quality and reduce the -cost of audible signals in the years to come. The COB encouraaes manufacturers to incorporate audible components in all newly manufactured visual signals, since this will greatly reduce the cost cif these devices. In summary, the CC3 strongly supports the use of audible traffic signals and prefers =edestrian activation. We feel that our state organization and local c:.apters can provide communities, manufacturers, and all others concerned with audible traffic signals witi invaluable assistance in ensuring that these devices are utilized to achieve the best possible results not only for The blind and .visually impaired, but for all California citizens.