Skip to Main Content
Pedestrians in a crosswalk near South Station in Boston.A woman in a wheelchair and her service dog traveling on a city sidewalk.Cars traveling around a rotary/roundabout.People sitting at an outdoor café on Newbury Street in Boston.A wheelchair user boarding a trolley in Portland, Oregon.A woman and her service dog at a crosswalk with detectable warnings in San Francisco.

Accessible Pedestrian Signals

Author(s):

Bentzen, Billie Louise, Ph.D.; Tabor, Lee S., AIA

Organization:

U.S. Access Board

Publisher/Date:

U.S. Access Board, 1998

Rating:

Useful

Abstract:

This document describes the range of signals available in 1998 that were useful to people with vision limitations. It is reviewed here because it is the only document on APS currently available on the Access Board site. We recommend that people consult Accessible Pedestrian Signals: A Synthesis and Guide to Best Practice, either the Summary or the full document (see reviews elsewhere in this study). Nonetheless, the technology described in this old monograph is more than most places have today. So it could be appropiate as a discriptive tool of existing experiences, not of what is available.

The first half-dozen pages of this monograph describes the steps a blind person goes through to cross a street; the next dozen pages discuss the technologies and characteristics of accessible pedestrian signals available in 1998; and the remainder address installation and specifications. Included is a very useful chart that lists eleven products with their attributes.

Number of Pages:

37

Table of Contents?

Yes

Index?

No

Illustrations?

No

Material Type:

Journal Article

Key Document?

No

Categories:

Educational Materials & Research, National Guidelines & Policy; Advocacy & Planning, Specifications; Rationale (functional needs, behavioral characteristics, safey, & health)

Keywords:

Pedestrian Signals, APS, Materials and Products

Strengths:

  • Describes how a blind person navigates street crossing.
  • Establishes recommendations based on desired performance, and rationale behind recommendations is usually given.

Weaknesses:

  • The study was written in 1998. As a consequence, the specification writer will have to go elsewhere to find new technologies.
  • The section on pedestrian detection technologies is too brief.

Record Last Updated:

July 2006

Top

[ Back to Previous Page ]