Laserfiche WebLink
upon a range of corner radii and attached/separated sidewalk configurations. An advisory note <br />(R303.1) in this draft notes the benefits for pedestrians. <br />Cross slope provisions at midblock curb ramps (R303) have been revised in response to industry <br />comment to permit warping to meet roadway grade. Similar changes have been made to <br />technical provisions at pedestrian crossings (R305.2.2). Crossings of streets without stop control <br />would be permitted a 1:20 maximum cross slope. <br />Running slope limits at crosswalks (R305.2.3) are maintained at 1:20 maximum in this draft. <br />Many commenters noted that design practices that approach this limit in new construction may <br />have to mill the roadway crown before resurfacing in order to retain usable crossings. <br />R208 Accessible Pedestrian Signals (technical provisions at R306). APS provisions in this draft <br />differ only slightly from those of the June 2002 draft. Many commenters to the June 2002 draft <br />expressed concerns about the costs of retrofitting intersections with APS, which is not required <br />by these or prior proposals, which guide only new construction and alterations. Where new <br />pedestrian signals are being installed or added, scoping in this document would require that they <br />incorporate audible and vibrotactile features. <br />Comments from disability organizations and individuals to the June 2002 draft were diverse. <br />Many who believed that retrofitting was required objected to what they understood to be <br />excessive cost. And even those who did not support a general requirement that all future <br />pedestrian signals incorporate audible and vibrotactile formats nevertheless saw the need for <br />them at certain types of intersections including irregular crossings, lengthy crossings, and at <br />complex intersections with multiple vehicle turning phases or leading pedestrian interval <br />phasing. Although many responders noted the utility of non -visual cues, a clear majority of <br />commenters who identified themselves as blind supported universal pedestrian signals. <br />R209 Protruding Objects (technical provisions at R401). Advisory notes have been added at <br />several places in this document to remind users of the need to consider projections into the <br />pedestrian circulation route when coordinating the placement of improvements, appurtenances, <br />utilities, or street furniture. Comments from disability organizations and individuals identified <br />blocked or compromised pedestrian routes as a major barrier to independent travel. Protruding <br />objects provisions in this draft have been revised only to accommodate the new format and add <br />advisory information. <br />R210 Pedestrian Signs (technical provisions at R409). An advisory note has been added to <br />clarify requirements for visual legibility in signs that indicate sidewalk closure, pedestrian <br />detour, and tourist route signage covered in MUTCD. Braille street name signage is required <br />only on APS pedbuttons (R306.4.2). <br />Signage provisions in this draft have been revised only to accommodate the new format and add <br />advisory information. <br />R211 Street Furniture (technical provisions at R307). Advisory notes have been added at several <br />places in this document to remind users of the need to consider the dimensions and use of <br />10 <br />