AASHTO SCOTE June 19 th , 2007

2. AASHTO SCOTEJune 19th, 2007 Update: Public Rights-of-Way Rulemaking Scott Windley, PROW Team Leader Dennis Cannon, Transportation Specialist Lois Thibault, Research Coordinator U.S. Access Board

3. New pedestrian guidelines: The Access Board began work on public rights-of-way guidelines (PROWAG) to supplement ADAAG in 1992: ►section 14 (NPRM 2002/IFR 1994); ► sidewalk video and design manual (1997); ► advisory committee (1999); ► PROWAAC report (2001); ► draft PROWAG NoA (June ‘02); ► revised draft PROWAG NoA (November ’05)

4. PROWAG adapts ADAAG, but.... The PROWAG draft adapts ADAAG to the rights-of-way environment. The new guidelines will be a stand-alone document using rights-of-way industry measures and language. Key differences: ► the slope limits of an accessible route are not applied to sidewalks; ► there is no path-of-travel requirement, ► new communications features (DW, APS) are required, and ► metric units lead.

5. Organization of the draft (2): ► Preamble (discussion) --explains decision making; highlights changes --Q&A on alterations ► Text --R1: general --R2: scoping requirements --R3: PROW technical provisions --R4: references to other (building) technical provisions in ADA/ABA-AG ► www.access-board.gov/prowac/draft.htm

6. Table of Contents R1 Application and Administration R2 Scoping Requirements R3 Technical Provisions --Pedestrian access route (PAR) --Alternate circulation path --Curb ramps and blended transitions --Detectable warning surfaces --Pedestrian crossings --Accessible pedestrian signals (APS) --Street furniture --On-street parking --Callboxes R4 Supplementary Technical Provisions (from ADA/ABA-AG)

7. PROWAG Key Provisions: A high degree of convenient access is easiest to achieve in new construction NEW CONSTRUCTION: THE ‘CORN FIELD IN KANSAS’

8. PROWAG Key Provisions: In alterations, you may not be able to optimize conditions for every user (follow new construction guidelines to the maximum extent feasible) ALTERATIONS RESURFACING RECONSTRUCTION

9. Next steps in rulemaking: We are currently working with key highway industry stakeholders to develop the data we need to analyze cost/benefit issues for the regulatory assessment: ►AASHTO ► APWA ► FHWA ► ITE ► Tx DOT ► TRB

10. Key cost issues identified: Highway industry stakeholders reviewed the draft guidelines and a 2001 industry cost study of the PROWAAC recommendations over the course of several meetings. By consensus, five cost items were identified as significant: ►detectable warnings (savings from reduced area) ► APS (integration may lower cost) ► tabled intersections ► temporary pedestrian routes ► roundabout signalization

11. PROWAG Detectable Warnings: All ramps and raised crossings must have detectable warnings to provide notice underfoot of the change from a pedestrian to a vehicular route. RETROFIT PORTLAND, OR DWs AT WHITE HOUSE

12. PROWAG Detectable Warnings: Blended transitions have a slope of less than 5%. Detectable warnings are provided across the entire transition.

13. PROWAG Detectable warnings are required at medians.

14. PROWAG Accessible Pedestrian Signal (APS): When new pedestrian signals are installed, include APS. Audible signal is integrated in pedbutton.

15. PROWAG APS: Provide 30”x48” clear ground space at all controls within reach range. 48” HIGH 10” AWAY

16. APS • While we don’t know what is happening everywhere we do know… • The State of Maryland has a policy in place to include APS in all new Ped signal installations • FHWA encourage the use of the draft in absence of specific PROW standards

17. APS • The draft ties installation of APS to: • Providing pedestrian signals (in new construction and alterations) • It is NOT a retrofit requirement and is NOT tied to the marking of crosswalks. • NCHRP 3-62 has helped the signals technical committee develop language for MUTCD which the Access Board will coordinate with for consistancy.

18. PROWAG Tabled Intersections: Where two directions of travel intersect at corners (or where a turn must be made), the PAR must be ‘level’ (2% in both directions) or ‘tabled’. (5% where intersection has no stop control) THIS… ….NOT THIS!

19. PROWAG Temporary PARs: When the PAR is detoured, provide an alternate route; same-side is best, if feasible (MUTCD)

20. PROWAG Temporary PARs: The alternate circulation path needs curb ramps, too

21. PROWAG Roundabouts: Provide pedestrian signals at roundabouts where pedestrian crossings are more than one lane. TWO HEADS MAY BE BETTER THAN THREE (AND RARELY USED…)

22. Signalization of Roundabouts • Applies to multi-lane roundabouts • We currently do not know what jurisdictions are doing. • The Access Board with FHWA are trying to do some experimentation. • There is also a NCHRP project (3-78) doing research.

23. Technical assistance coming soon! ‘PLANNING AND DESIGN FOR ALTERATIONS IN THE PROW’ TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM PROWAAC

24. Board PROW resources: Publications: • accessible sidewalks design manual • accessible sidewalks videotape • synthesis on detectable warnings • bulletin on roundabout accessibility • curriculum on accessible pedestrian design Research: • controllers and APS; APS case studies • wayfinding • slope effects on manual wheelchairs • exterior lighting • roundabout signalization

25. Questions…? Scott Windley, PROW Team Leader 202/272-0025 (v) or windley@access-board.gov; Dennis Cannon, Transportation Specialist 202/272-0015 (v) or cannon@access-board.gov; Lois Thibault, Coordinator of Research 202/272-0023 (v) or thibault@access-board.gov TTY: 202/272-0082; Fax: 202/272-0081