Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 41
41 A) Dart/Dash B) Multiple Threat The The pedestrian enters the traffic lane in pedestrian front of stopped traffic and conflicts with a walks into the vehicle traveling in the same direction as roadway in the stopped vehicle. front of an approaching vehicle, requiring that vehicle to make an avoidance maneuver (e.g., severe braking or sudden lane change). C) Walking Along Roadway D) Other The pedestrian walks along the roadway The looking for a gap through which to cross pedestrian's and steps into the path of a vehicle. path conflicts with a vehicle's path and cannot be classified by any of the other scenarios. Figure 20. Definition of conflict categories (Adapted from Pedestrian Facilities User GuideProviding Safety and Mobility ). for storage. The vehicle counts were completed by watching Conflict information was a determination of whether a the videotapes and counting the vehicles traveling through conflict occurred during the crossing event and, if so, what the study site. These counts were divided into 5-minute peri- type of conflict it was. Conflicts were defined by one of four ods in each direction of vehicle travel. The remaining items general categories, as shown in Figure 20. Most crossing were reduced with a combination of the PDA data and the events occurred without conflicts. video recordings. Reducing gap and crossing data involved observing each In the spreadsheet file, worksheets were created for manu- crossing event with respect to the time the pedestrian arrived ally recording motorist behavior, conflicts, and gap and cross- at certain points along the crossing route. The crossing behav- ing data. Technicians would then review the video for a site ior was also recorded, as were any comments by the observer. and record the pertinent information for each crossing event, Five distinct times were recorded for each pedestrian, as correlating each event to a recorded event in the PDA data defined in Figure 21. For vehicles that passed through the site when possible. At each site, however, there were crossing during a crossing event, their time of arrival and travel lane events not recorded in the PDA on site; these events were were recorded. added to the spreadsheet. The motorist behavior information collected for a particular Summary crossing event included the PDA record number (if applicable), the crossing number (a count of both PDA records and events The research used observational studies of motorist and not in the PDA), the number of pedestrians (if a group or clus- pedestrian behavior to evaluate the effectiveness of pedestrian ter), the motorist compliance behavior in both directions crossing treatments at 42 sites in seven states. Several measures of travel, the stopping distance for vehicles in both directions of of effectiveness were used as surrogates for safety perform- travel, and comments about the behavior of the pedestrian. ance, because the timing and duration of the study did not
OCR for page 42
42 E D C B A KEY: A = pedestrian approaches curb, indicates interest to cross B = pedestrian steps off of near side curb C* = pedestrian reaches middle of median D* = pedestrian departs middle of median E = pedestrian steps onto far side curb *C and D are omitted for sites with no median. Figure 21. Crossing diagram. permit the collection of before-and-after pedestrian crash data locations to provide a permanent record of pedestrian and at several promising study sites. Several criteria were used to motorist behavior at each study site. Members of the research select the study sites, chief among them: presence of a marked team also staged crossings at each site to provide a consistent crosswalk, pedestrian activity, proximity to transit stops, and reference point for comparison among all sites. Palmtop com- high-volume, high-speed streets. The study sites were grouped puters were used on site to record certain pedestrian and into three categories according to function and design: motorist behaviors not easily extracted from video. The red signal or beacon devices (e.g., half signals and HAWK); research team also gathered data about site conditions (e.g., "active when present" warning devices (e.g., flashing beacons geometry and dimensions in vicinity of crossing). These field or crossing flags); and enhanced and/or high-visibility signs studies provided a comprehensive, multi-faceted dataset that and markings. Videocameras were placed at inconspicuous permitted a wide variety of analyses.