The Wall Street Journal

Audible Crosswalk Signals Divide Blind Community --- Devices Are Common
in Europe, But Opponents Say They Can Stigmatize and Distract

By Jeffrey A. Tannenbaum Staff Reporter of The Wall Street Journal

03/13/2001 The Wall Street Journal

(Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)

To public-works officials in Baltimore, it seemed like a good idea:
Install the city's first audible traffic signals, to both aid blind
pedestrians and help the U.S. play catch-up on a promising technology.
But last October, when officials laid plans to outfit four intersections
with beeping devices, they ran into unexpected flak -- from some blind
residents themselves. The nonprofit National Federation of the Blind,
which maintains that audible signals are usually unnecessary, objected to
the proposed locations. The group says the spread of needless audible
signals would reinforce stereotypes of the blind as people who need huge
amounts of help.

So Baltimore tabled the plan -- only to trigger a protest by members of
the nonprofit American Council of the Blind, which had sought the signals
in the first place. Now Baltimore is going ahead with a slightly altered
plan, months behind the original timetable. "It doesn't make it easy,
from a public-policy perspective, when two groups of the blind differ
drastically on these signals," says Sheila Dixon, president of the city
council.
Division within the blind community has slowed adoption of the
audible-signal technology in much of the country, says Lois Thibault,
research coordinator for the U.S. Architectural and Barriers Compliance
Board, which makes rules under federal disabilities law. The so-called
accessible signals beep, chirp or give voice messages to alert the blind
when a "Walk/Don't Walk" signal changes. Some devices emit noises
automatically, while others require activation by a button.
By some estimates, there are roughly 5,000 communities in the U.S. that
have some audible signals. Many are on the West Coast, such as San
Francisco and Seattle. Ms. Thibault and others say many blind individuals
have requested audible signals near their homes, but the requests often
meet opposition from other blind people. Clashes over proposed signals
have arisen in recent years not only in Baltimore, but also in
Minneapolis, Vancouver, Wash., Portland, Ore., and Hot Springs, Ark,
according to advocates for the blind.
Though declaring itself "flexible" since 1992 on the issue of audible
signals, the National Federation of the Blind confirms that its chapters
-- and sometimes just individual members -- occasionally oppose requests
for signals. "If there is a plain four-way stop and no good reason for an
audible traffic signal, the mere request of a single individual would not
justify it," says James Gashel, director of governmental affairs.
Indeed, the wrangling in Baltimore led the city to change one of the four
locations slated to get the signals to a more complicated intersection.
The federation believes the signals, if used in intersections that aren't
especially complex, can stigmatize the blind. The group also believes
that money used for signals could be better applied to programs such as
job training for the blind. Some members think the devices can even be
harmful at times.
Scott Labarre, a 32-year-old Colorado lawyer, says he was once distracted
by a beeping signal and thus nearly stepped in front of a moving car. "I
was afraid my cane was going to get crunched, if not myself," he says. In
Salt Lake City, 52-year-old Ray Martin says audible signals "are useless
to me. . . . I've been taught the proper skills of cane travel."
The National Federation viewpoint tends to reflect the opinions of the
most mobile and cane-savvy of the blind, sometimes known among themselves
as "super blinks." The American Council, which advocates changing
facilities to help blind people, tends to speak for the less mobile --
and more numerous -- members of the community. Both groups say they
represent all blind people.
Marlaina Lieberg, a 51-year-old Seattle resident and member of the
American Council, says she was once hit by a car in Boston when a "Walk"
light changed sooner than she expected. An audible signal would have
helped, she says, calling the issue a "no-brainer." She adds: "Why
wouldn't you want any cue you could possibly use to enhance your safety?"

Accessible signals are already widely used in Europe, Japan and
Australia. Bob Panich, owner of a company that installs such signals in
Australia, says: "We're most surprised at the U.S. being so far behind in
this regard, knowing that the U.S. also has antidiscrimination laws and a
powerful deaf/blind lobby."
The U.S. is moving to catch up. Following intense lobbying by disability
coalitions, Congress in 1999 made federal funds available for accessible
signals in the same way it was already available for such things as
sidewalk wheelchair ramps. Only traffic signals that are along public bus
or rail lines are eligible. The devices typically cost $400 to $500 per
box, with eight needed for a four-corner intersection.
In addition, a key federal manual for highway engineers late last year
included standards for accessible signals for the first time. The action
removed a huge stumbling block: communities' fear of liability suits if
they installed signals without uniform standards.
"A lot of communities didn't know what to put in. Now a standard is
available," says Julia Wilkie, a project engineer at MDU Resources Inc.'s
Wagner Smith unit, which installs and maintains traffic signals for 140
Ohio communities.
Another boost for accessible signals came in January, when a federal
advisory panel endorsed the devices, making a federally mandated phase-in
likely within a few years. Such a mandate could require that new
intersections or ones being rebuilt include accommodations for the blind.

The signals promise to take some hazardous guesswork out of the way the
blind cross streets: They listen carefully for traffic sounds, then take
their chances. When Mr. Labarre, the Colorado lawyer, needs to cross
Denver's Colorado Boulevard where it intersects Mexico Avenue, there is
often heavy traffic moving along Colorado. So he listens for that traffic
to stop for a red light. When he thinks he hears that, he enters the
crosswalk, sweeping a white cane back and forth in sequence with his
steps. Crossing "is not terribly complicated," he maintains.
But the procedure seems terribly intimidating and risky to many other
blind people, who are happy when they encounter audible signals. "You
know precisely when the walk signal is on," says Christopher Gray, a
46-year-old San Francisco technical writer. When standing at Shattuck
Avenue and Center Street in Berkeley, Calif., Mr. Gray says he hears a
chirping sound if pedestrians crossing Shattuck have a "Walk" signal;
otherwise he hears a cuckoo sound.
Several trends in traffic control have been making it harder for the
blind to predict when lights will change. Computerized traffic flow, for
example, sets traffic lights depending on such things as traffic density
instead of at regular timed intervals. Advocates of audible signals say
that at least a dozen blind pedestrians have died while crossing streets
during the last three years, though whether an audible signal would have
changed the outcome isn't always clear.
Berl Colley, a 58-year-old computer programmer in Lacey, Wash., says he
was once struck by a car and badly bruised. "Now, every time I cross the
street, I wish I had some audible indication that I should go," he says.
While the disagreements among the blind have slowed the advance of
audible signals, marketers think the industry is poised for a leap
forward. "It's going to be another two years before it really takes off,
but it is building momentum now," says John McGaffey, president of Polara
Engineering Inc. The Fullerton, Calif., firm, has sold audible signals
for several hundred intersections, including many in Las Vegas.
Meanwhile, Novax Industries Corp., Vancouver, has outfitted about 1,000
intersections in the U.S. and Canada during the last six years.
Most accessible signals are heard by all within earshot, but there is
another promising technology to help blind pedestrians. In San Francisco,
about 100 blind people carry special receivers marketed by Talking Signs
Inc., a small company in Baton Rouge, La. The receivers pick up
infrared-light signals from transmitters installed inside buildings and,
in a few cases, at intersections. Users can hear a computer-generated
human voice describe the surroundings and the status of any traffic
lights.