Individual 65036's submission
CAN-ASC-2.4 – Wayfinding and Signage
Feedback items
Item id
1774890958915_971
Heading id
heading-31
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Technical such as dimensions or application of the standard
What should we change?
Corridors may require windows at the ends of corridors in unsprinklered buildings in accordance with the building code.
What should we change it to?
This clause should be revised and could include language about window treatments to reduce glare and harsh lighting transitions (e.g., films, Low-E coatings, reflective coatings, etc), rather than fully removing the window.
Why should we change it?
To harmonize with building code requirements.
Heading text
10.1.3.1 Preventing glare and shadow
Heading number portion
10.1.3.1
Item id
1774891059724_998
Heading id
s10.3
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
Adding a reference to PAS 6463:2022 may be useful for designers and users of the standard.
What should we change it to?
General comment – PAS 6463:2022 Design for the mind – Neurodiversity and the built environment – Guide includes many good resources about colour and pattern selection that could be referenced by this standard.
Further, the 2025 National Building Code of Canada in Sentence 3.8.3.6.(17) requires that “except for facilities for persons with cognitive disabilities such as dementia, doorways leading from a public corridor or a corridor used by the public that provide access to a public area or an exit shall be provided with a door or door frame that has a readily apparent visual contrast with adjacent wall surfaces.”
It may be a good idea to include some guidance on cognitive disabilities, where colour may be overwhelming or create safety concerns, in addition to a general reference to PAS 6463.
Why should we change it?
Align with other best-practice guidelines and the building code.
Heading text
10.3 Colour choice
Heading number portion
10.3
Item id
1774891192579_440
Heading id
s11.3.1
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
Note #1 should be deleted or revised.
What should we change it to?
Suggest phrasing as:
"Where technically feasible, avoid shared infrastructures, including cycling paths between access points to buses and public transportation, as they represent challenges for the accessibility community".
Why should we change it?
Was the TransLink and BC Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure Design Guide for Bus Stops Adjacent to Cycling Infrastructure considered when this note was created? Additionally, the Transportation Association of Canada has published a guide Accommodating People with Disabilities and Island Platform Bus Stops which offers comparisons from multiple Canadian jurisdictions. There may be conditions where shared infrastructure cannot be avoided and one of the guidelines should be referenced as a way to mitigate concerns.
Heading text
11.3.1 Additional specifications for exterior paths of travel
Heading number portion
11.3.1
Item id
1774891344850_540
Heading id
s11.3.1
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Technical such as dimensions or application of the standard
What should we change?
Can Note #3 be expanded with a technical criteria, in addition to why decorative crosswalks should be avoided?
What should we change it to?
Not sure. Needs more background info.
Why should we change it?
Can note #3 explain why decorative crosswalks are to be avoided on busy roadways that have high-volumes of traffic? This requirement may be hard to enforce without a technical threshold for what constitutes high-volumes of traffic, and therefore, lead to inconsistent application.
Heading text
11.3.1 Additional specifications for exterior paths of travel
Heading number portion
11.3.1
Item id
1774891407133_356
Heading id
heading-54
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Editorial such as spelling, grammar, formatting and accessibility
What should we change?
11.4.2.2.(a)(i) - "at the tops of stairs and ramps"
What should we change it to?
"at the top of flights of stairs and ramps"
Why should we change it?
To harmonize with the National Building Code of Canada wording, which uses the word "flights" for stairs.
Heading text
11.4.2.2 Location
Heading number portion
11.4.2.2
Item id
1774891611557_509
Heading id
heading-62
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Technical such as dimensions or application of the standard
What should we change?
11.4.2.5.5.(c) - "Have an increased depth to enhance detectability and allow for a longer stopping distance when no set-back is present"
What should we change it to?
Remove this clause, or expand it with a technical criteria for the depth/hazard.
Why should we change it?
CSA B651 and the 2025 National Building Code of Canada use a 600-650mm depth as the lower and upper limits for tactile attention indicators. Depths beyond that range would not be considered code-compliant and may not be enforceable. It would be beneficial to elaborate on what increased depths are useful and what basis this standard is using (i.e., is ISO 23599 depth being used here?)
Heading text
11.4.2.5.5 Dimensions of attention indicators
Heading number portion
11.4.2.5.5
Item id
1774891694610_707
Heading id
s12.2.8
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Technical such as dimensions or application of the standard
What should we change?
12.2.8.(c) - "For example, hours of operation may be installed on the non-operational door swing when possible"
What should we change it to?
Delete the clause.
Why should we change it?
Subsequent sections of the standard discourage signage on doors, leaving it as a last resort. This note contradicts that.
Heading text
12.2.8 Requirements for different types of signage
Heading number portion
12.2.8
Item id
1774891827358_621
Heading id
s12.10.4
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Technical such as dimensions or application of the standard
What should we change?
Clause 12.10.4.(a) and note #1 - "be automatic when audible information is transmitted"
What should we change it to?
Should incorporate language that automatic announcements are required to have a mute button or other means to cancel playback.
Why should we change it?
For people with neurodivergence, automatic announcements can be overstimulating. To strike a balance, a means to temporarily mute the announcements may be beneficial.
Heading text
12.10.4 Activation of audible signs
Heading number portion
12.10.4
Item id
1774891923911_714
Heading id
s12.10.5
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Technical such as dimensions or application of the standard
What should we change?
12.10.5.(a)
What should we change it to?
This standard should reference to CSA B44, which already covers audible announcements and chime tones for elevators.
Why should we change it?
To harmonize with CSA B44, "Safety Code for Elevators and Escalators". Right now, CSA B44 contains provisions for the use of chimes or other audible tones, rather than strictly voice prompts.
Heading text
12.10.5 Elevators
Heading number portion
12.10.5
Submission ID
65036
Submitted by