Wasting money due to ADA |

Wasting money due to ADA

Have you noticed that whenever a new or updated road paving project is being done, wheelchair ramps and pedestrian-crossing traffic lights are included? They are installed even in areas where there is no entrance or egress for either wheelchair users or able-bodied pedestrians. Some of the ramps take you directly to a highway with no possible place to go to on the other side.

A new and much-needed series of traffic lights at the intersection of Montour Run and Beaver Grade roads near the Moon/Robinson border is just about completed. There are pedestrian-crossing signals but there is no possible way to safely cross (there are no sidewalks, you see).

There are even push-button extensions that reach over a guardrail. The problem is that you would have to be standing on the highway to push the button to activate the crossing lights.

I learned that these signals were a part of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements and I am sure that those requirements are costing taxpayers billions of wasted dollars.

Note to U.S. Rep. Tim Murphy, R-Upper St. Clair (since I know he reads the Trib and represents us in the House): I believe you would be a hero if you would introduce legislation to correct this unintended consequence that either was not properly thought out or has been inappropriately interpreted in the ADA.

Gilbert Dadowski


TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.