National Academies Press: OpenBook
« Previous: Abbreviations, Acronyms, and Initialisms
Page 65
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2006. Improving Pedestrian Safety at Unsignalized Crossings. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13962.
×
Page 65
Page 66
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2006. Improving Pedestrian Safety at Unsignalized Crossings. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13962.
×
Page 66
Page 67
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2006. Improving Pedestrian Safety at Unsignalized Crossings. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13962.
×
Page 67
Page 68
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2006. Improving Pedestrian Safety at Unsignalized Crossings. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13962.
×
Page 68
Page 69
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2006. Improving Pedestrian Safety at Unsignalized Crossings. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13962.
×
Page 69
Page 70
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2006. Improving Pedestrian Safety at Unsignalized Crossings. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13962.
×
Page 70
Page 71
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2006. Improving Pedestrian Safety at Unsignalized Crossings. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13962.
×
Page 71
Page 72
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2006. Improving Pedestrian Safety at Unsignalized Crossings. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13962.
×
Page 72
Page 73
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2006. Improving Pedestrian Safety at Unsignalized Crossings. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13962.
×
Page 73
Page 74
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2006. Improving Pedestrian Safety at Unsignalized Crossings. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13962.
×
Page 74
Page 75
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2006. Improving Pedestrian Safety at Unsignalized Crossings. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13962.
×
Page 75
Page 76
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2006. Improving Pedestrian Safety at Unsignalized Crossings. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13962.
×
Page 76
Page 77
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2006. Improving Pedestrian Safety at Unsignalized Crossings. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13962.
×
Page 77
Page 78
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2006. Improving Pedestrian Safety at Unsignalized Crossings. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13962.
×
Page 78
Page 79
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2006. Improving Pedestrian Safety at Unsignalized Crossings. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13962.
×
Page 79
Page 80
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2006. Improving Pedestrian Safety at Unsignalized Crossings. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13962.
×
Page 80
Page 81
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2006. Improving Pedestrian Safety at Unsignalized Crossings. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13962.
×
Page 81
Page 82
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2006. Improving Pedestrian Safety at Unsignalized Crossings. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13962.
×
Page 82
Page 83
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2006. Improving Pedestrian Safety at Unsignalized Crossings. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13962.
×
Page 83
Page 84
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2006. Improving Pedestrian Safety at Unsignalized Crossings. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13962.
×
Page 84
Page 85
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2006. Improving Pedestrian Safety at Unsignalized Crossings. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13962.
×
Page 85
Page 86
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2006. Improving Pedestrian Safety at Unsignalized Crossings. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13962.
×
Page 86
Page 87
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2006. Improving Pedestrian Safety at Unsignalized Crossings. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13962.
×
Page 87
Page 88
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2006. Improving Pedestrian Safety at Unsignalized Crossings. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13962.
×
Page 88
Page 89
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2006. Improving Pedestrian Safety at Unsignalized Crossings. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13962.
×
Page 89
Page 90
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2006. Improving Pedestrian Safety at Unsignalized Crossings. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13962.
×
Page 90
Page 91
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2006. Improving Pedestrian Safety at Unsignalized Crossings. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13962.
×
Page 91
Page 92
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2006. Improving Pedestrian Safety at Unsignalized Crossings. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13962.
×
Page 92
Page 93
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2006. Improving Pedestrian Safety at Unsignalized Crossings. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13962.
×
Page 93
Page 94
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2006. Improving Pedestrian Safety at Unsignalized Crossings. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13962.
×
Page 94
Page 95
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2006. Improving Pedestrian Safety at Unsignalized Crossings. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13962.
×
Page 95
Page 96
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2006. Improving Pedestrian Safety at Unsignalized Crossings. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13962.
×
Page 96
Page 97
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2006. Improving Pedestrian Safety at Unsignalized Crossings. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13962.
×
Page 97
Page 98
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2006. Improving Pedestrian Safety at Unsignalized Crossings. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13962.
×
Page 98

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

65 Introduction These guidelines provide general recommendations on pedestrian crossing treatments to consider at unsignalized intersections; in all cases, engineering judgment should be used in selecting a specific treatment for installation. The fol- lowing guidelines build on the recommendations of several studies and focus on unsignalized intersections. They do not apply to school crossings. Considerations (in addition to the procedure provided in these guidelines) should be used where a pedestrian treatment could present an increased safety risk to pedestrians, such as where there is poor sight distance, complex geometrics, or traffic signals. System of Treatments The installation of a pedestrian crossing treatment alone does not necessarily result in more vehicles stopping for pedestrians unless that device shows a red indication to the motorist. Therefore, treating a location to improve pedestrian access or safety should include several components. For example, in addition to traffic control devices (TCDs) such as signs or markings, geometric improvements (e.g., refuge island, roadway narrowing, and curb extensions) may be used to shorten the crossing distance (and hence the exposure time for the pedestrian). Traffic calming may be used to slow vehi- cle speeds near the pedestrian crossing. Overview of Procedure Figure A-1 provides an overview of the procedure. Tables A-1 and A-2 list the variables needed for the evaluation and the calculations that are to be performed, respectively. Step 1: Select Worksheet Two worksheets are available–a worksheet for speeds of 35 mph (55 km/h) or less and a worksheet for speeds that exceed 35 mph (55 km/h) where the community has a population of less than 10,000 or where a major transit stop exists. The first step is to select the appropriate worksheet. The speeds repre- sent the posted or statutory speed limit or the 85th percentile speed on the major street, whichever is higher. The work- sheets available are • Worksheet 1: 35 mph (55 km/h) or less (see Figure A-2) and • Worksheet 2: exceeds 35 mph (55 km/h), in communities with less than 10,000 in population, or where a major tran- sit stop exists (see Figure A-3). Step 2: Check Minimum Pedestrian Volume The minimum pedestrian volume for a peak-hour evalua- tion is 20 pedestrians per hour for both directions (14 ped/h if the major road speed exceeds 35 mph [55 km/h]). If fewer pedestrians are crossing the street, then geometric improve- ments (rather than signs, signals, or markings) such as traffic calming, median refuge islands, and curb extensions, are alternatives that can be considered. Step 3: Check Signal Warrant The MUTCD signal warrants are checked in Step 3 to determine whether to consider a signal at the site. The signal warrant procedures recommended in this step (which will be considered as changes to the MUTCD by the National Com- mittee on Uniform Traffic Control Devices) more closely align the Pedestrian Signal Warrant with the current (2003) Peak-Hour Signal Warrant for vehicles (with adjustment made to reflect the counting of pedestrians crossing the major roadway from both approaches rather than only the highest approach as used in the vehicle signal warrant). The work- sheets include equations that can determine the minimum required number of crossing pedestrians for a given major- road vehicle volume. A P P E N D I X A Guidelines for Pedestrian Crossing Treatments

66 Step 2. Does the crossing meet minimum peak-hour pedestrian volumes to be considered for a traffic control device type of treatment? NO Consider median refuge islands, curb extensions, traffic calming, etc. as feasible. No traffic control devices are recommended. YES Go to Step 3 Step 3. Does the crossing meet the warrant for a traffic signal? YES Warrant met, consider traffic signal if site is not within 300 ft (91 m) of another signal. NO Go to Step 4 Step 4. Estimate pedestrian delay. Step 5. Select treatment based upon total pedestrian delay and expected motorist compliance. Step 1. Select worksheet based on (1) posted or statutory speed limit or the 85th percentile speed on the major street and (2) other conditions present: a) Worksheet 1 - 35 mph (55 km/h) or less b) Worksheet 2 - Exceeds 35 mph (55 km/h) or locations where the community has a less than 10,000 population or where a major transit stop is present Figure A-1. Flowchart for Guidelines for Pedestrian Crossing Treatments.

67 INPUT VARIABLES TERM DISCUSSION ROAD CHARACTERISTICS Speed on the major street (mph) Smaj Use the major road posted or statutory speed limit for the facilities or, if available, the 85th percentile speed to determine which worksheet is applicable. Worksheet 1 is used when the speed is 35 mph (55 km/h) or less, while Worksheet 2 is used when the speed exceeds 35 mph (55 km/h). Pedestrian crossing distance (ft) L Pedestrian crossing distance represents the distance that a pedestrian would need to cross before reaching either the far curb or a median refuge island. The distance would be between the near and far curbs if a painted or raised median refuge island is not present, or to the median refuge island if the island is present. Note if a parking stall is present, its width should be included in the crossing distance measurement. Crossing distance rather than number of lanes was selected for the procedure so that the extra time needed by a pedestrian to cross bike lanes, two-way left-turn lanes, wide lanes, etc. could be considered. COUNTS Peak-hour pedestrian volume crossing major roadway (ped/h) Vp Pedestrian volume is the number of pedestrians crossing the major roadway in a peak hour. The count includes all pedestrian crossings of the major roadway at the location. Major road peak hour vehicle volume (veh/h) Vmaj-s Vmaj-d Vehicle volume represents the number of vehicles and bicycles on both approaches of the major road during a peak hour. If a painted or raised median refuge island is present of sufficient size to store pedestrians (minimum of 6 ft [1.8 m] wide), then consider the volume on each approach individually. In the signal warrant calculations, use the volume on both approaches (Vmaj-s). For the delay calculations, the volume (Vmaj-d) would reflect either both approaches if a refuge island is not present or each approach individually if a refuge island is present. LOCAL PARAMETERS Motorist compliance for region (high or low) Comp Compliance reflects the typical behavior of motorists for the site. If motorists tend to stop for a pedestrian attempting to cross at an uncontrolled location, then compliance is “high.” If motorists rarely stop for a crossing pedestrian, then compliance is “low.” Pedestrian walking speed (ft/s) Sp Walking speed represents the speed of the crossing pedestrians. Recent research has suggested walking speeds of 3.5 ft/s (1.1 m/s) for the general population and 3.0 ft/s (0.9 m/s) for the older population. If calculating for a site, determine the 15th percentile value of those using the crossing. Pedestrian start-up time and end clearance time (s) ts Start-up time is used in the calculation of the critical gap. A value of 3 s is suggested in the Highway Capacity Manual. Table A-1. Input Variables for Guidelines for Pedestrian Crossing Treatment.

68 CALCs TERM DISCUSSION Signal warrant check (ped/h) SC Regression equations were determined for the plots shown in the 2003 MUTCD Figures 4C-3 and 4C-4. These equations can calculate the minimum number of vehicles that would be needed at the given major road volume to meet the signal warrant. The recommendation made in 2006 to the National Committee on Uniform Traffic Control Devices is that the vehicles signal warrants values for crossing two lanes be used as the pedestrian signal warrant values. Because the pedestrian signal warrant is to reflect total pedestrian crossings rather than just the number of pedestrians on the higher approach, the vehicle signal warrant values should be divided by 0.75 to reflect an assumed directional distribution split of 75/25. Different equations are provided for low- speed and high-speed conditions. The worksheets provide instructions on checking the peak hour. Both the peak vehicle hour and the peak pedestrian hour may need to be checked. Critical gap (s) Tc Critical gap is the time in seconds below which a pedestrian will not attempt to begin crossing the street. For a single pedestrian, critical gap (tc) can be computed using Equation 18-17 of the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual. The equation includes consideration of the pedestrian walking speed (Sp), crossing distance (L), and start-up and end clearance times (ts). tc = (L/Sp) + ts Major road flow rate (veh/s) v Flow rate is a measure of the number of vehicles per second (v). For high-speed conditions, the number of vehicles is adjusted by dividing by 0.7. Flow rate is determined by: Low speed: v = Vmaj-p/3600 high speed: v = (Vmaj-p/0.7)/3600 It is based on the major road volume (Vmaj-d), which is the total of both approaches (or the approach being crossed if median refuge island is present) during the peak hour (veh/h). Average pedestrian delay (s/person) dp The 2000 Highway Capacity Manual includes Equation 18-21 that can be used to determine the average delay per pedestrian at an unsignalized intersection crossing (s/person). dp = ( )1vte v 1 c vt c − − It depends upon critical gap (tc), the vehicular flow rate of the crossing (v), and the mean vehicle headway. Total pedestrian delay (ped-h) Dp Total pedestrian delay (Dp) uses the average pedestrian delay (dp) and multiplies that value by the number of pedestrians (Vp) to determine the total pedestrian delay for the approach. Dp = (dp × Vp)/3,600 Table A-2. Calculations for Guidelines for Pedestrian Crossing Treatment.

69 WORKSHEET 1: PEAK-HOUR, 35 MPH (55 KM/H) OR LESS Analyst and Site Information Analyst: Analysis Date: Data Collection Date: Major Street: Minor Street or Location: Peak Hour: Step 1: Select worksheet (speed reflects posted or statutory speed limit or 85th percentile speed on the major street): a) Worksheet 1 – 35 mph (55 km/h) or less b) Worksheet 2 – exceeds 35 mph (55 km/h), communities with less than 10,000, or where major transit stop exists Step 2: Does the crossing meet minimum pedestrian volumes to be considered for a TCD type of treatment? Peak-hour pedestrian volume (ped/h), Vp 2a If 2a ≥ 20 ped/h, then go to Step 3. If 2a < 20 ped/h, then consider median refuge islands, curb extensions, traffic calming, etc. as feasible. Step 3: Does the crossing meet the pedestrian volume warrant for a traffic signal? Major road volume, total of both approaches during peak hour (veh/h), Vmaj-s 3a Minimum signal warrant volume for peak hour (use 3a for Vmaj-s), SC SC = (0.00021 Vmaj-s2 – 0.74072 Vmaj-s + 734.125)/0.75 OR [(0.00021 3a2 – 0.74072 3a + 734.125)/0.75] 3b If 3b < 133, then enter 133. If 3b ≥ 133, then enter 3b. 3c If 15th percentile crossing speed of pedestrians is less than 3.5 ft/s (1.1 m/s), then reduce 3c by up to 50 percent; otherwise enter 3c. 3d If 2a ≥ 3d, then the warrant has been met and a traffic signal should be considered if not within 300 ft (91 m) of another traffic signal. Otherwise, the warrant has not been met. Go to Step 4. Step 4: Estimate pedestrian delay. Pedestrian crossing distance, curb to curb (ft), L 4a Pedestrian walking speed (ft/s), Sp 4b Pedestrian start-up time and end clearance time (s), ts 4c Critical gap required for crossing pedestrian (s), tc = (L/Sp) + ts OR [(4a/4b) + 4c)] 4d Major road volume, total both approaches or approach being crossed if median refuge island is present during peak hour (veh/h), Vmaj-d 4e Major road flow rate (veh/s), v = Vmaj-d/3600 OR [4e/3600] 4f Average pedestrian delay (s/person), dp = (ev tc – v tc – 1) / v OR [ (e4f x 4d – 4f x 4d – 1) / 4f ] 4g Total pedestrian delay (h), Dp = (dp × Vp)/3,600 OR [(4g×2a)/3600] (this is estimated delay for all pedestrians crossing the major roadway without a crossing treatment – assumes 0% compliance). This calculated value can be replaced with the actual total pedestrian delay measured at the site. 4h Step 5: Select treatment based upon total pedestrian delay and expected motorist compliance. Expected motorist compliance at pedestrian crossings in region, Comp = high or low 5a Total Pedestrian Delay, Dp (from 4h) and Motorist Compliance, Comp (from 5a) Treatment Category (see Descriptions of Sample Treatments for examples) Dp ≥ 21.3 h (Comp = high or low) OR 5.3 h ≤ Dp < 21.3 h and Comp = low RED 1.3 h ≤ Dp < 5.3 h (Comp = high or low) OR 5.3 h ≤ Dp < 21.3 h and Comp = high ACTIVE OR ENHANCED Dp < 1.3 h (Comp = high or low) CROSSWALK Figure A-2. Worksheet 1.

70 WORKSHEET 2: PEAK-HOUR, EXCEEDS 35 MPH (55 KM/H) Analyst and Site Information Analyst: Analysis Date: Data Collection Date: Major Street: Minor Street or Location: Peak Hour: Step 1: Select worksheet (speed reflects posted or statutory speed limit or 85th percentile speed on the major street): a) Worksheet 1 – 35 mph (55 km/h) or less b) Worksheet 2 – exceeds 35 mph (55 km/h), communities with less than 10,000, or where major transit stop exists Step 2: Does the crossing meet minimum pedestrian volumes to be considered for a TCD type of treatment? Peak-hour pedestrian volume (ped/h), Vp 2a If 2a ≥ 14 ped/h, then go to Step 3. If 2a < 14 ped/h, then consider median refuge islands, curb extensions, traffic calming, etc. as feasible. Step 3: Does the crossing meet the pedestrian volume warrant for a traffic signal? Major road volume, total of both approaches during peak hour (veh/h), Vmaj-s 3a Minimum signal warrant volume for peak hour (use 3a for Vmaj-s), SC SC = (0.00035 Vmaj-s2 – 0.80083 Vmaj-s + 529.197)/0.75 OR [(0.00035 3a2 – 0.80083 3a + 529.197)/0.75] 3b If 3b < 93, then enter 93. If 3b ≥ 93, then enter 3b. 3c If 15th percentile crossing speed of pedestrians is less than 3.5 ft/s (1.1 m/s), then reduce 3c by up to 50 percent; otherwise enter 3c. 3d If 2a ≥ 3d, then the warrant has been met and a traffic signal should be considered if not within 300 ft (91 m) of another traffic signal. Otherwise, the warrant has not been met. Go to Step 4. Step 4: Estimate pedestrian delay. Pedestrian crossing distance, curb to curb (ft), L 4a Pedestrian walking speed (ft/s), Sp 4b Pedestrian start-up time and end clearance time (s), ts 4c Critical gap required for crossing pedestrian (s), tc = (L/Sp) + ts OR [(4a/4b) + 4c)] 4d Major road volume, total both approaches or approach being crossed if median refuge island is present during peak hour (veh/h), Vmaj-d 4e Major road flow rate (veh/s), v = (Vmaj-d/0.7)/3600 OR [(4e/0.7)/3600] 4f Average pedestrian delay (s/person), dp = (ev tc – v tc – 1) / v OR [ (e4f x 4d – 4f x 4d – 1) / 4f ] 4g Total pedestrian delay (h), Dp = (dp × Vp)/3,600 OR [(4g×2a)/3600] (this is estimated delay for all pedestrians crossing the major roadway without a crossing treatment – assumes 0% compliance). This calculated value can be replaced with the actual total pedestrian delay measured at the site. 4h Step 5: Select treatment based upon total pedestrian delay and expected motorist compliance. Expected motorist compliance at pedestrian crossings in region, Comp = high or low 5a Total Pedestrian Delay, Dp (from 4h) and Motorist Compliance, Comp (from 5a) Treatment Category (see Descriptions of Sample Treatments for examples) Dp ≥ 21.3 h (Comp = high or low) OR 5.3 h ≤ Dp < 21.3 h and Comp = low RED Dp < 5.3 h (Comp = high or low) OR 5.3 h ≤ Dp < 21.3 h and Comp = high ACTIVE OR ENHANCED Figure A-3. Worksheet 2.

Step 4: Estimate Approach Pedestrian Delay The average pedestrian delay equation from the 2000 High- way Capacity Manual is used to determine the approach pedestrian delay. Step 5: Select Appropriate Treatment The total pedestrian delay along with the expected compli- ance is used to determine the treatment category to consider for the site. Example Using Guidelines Known Citizens have requested a pedestrian treatment at the 2700 block crossing of Elm Street. Known characteristics of the site include • Four-lane road with no pedestrian refuge median; • 56 ft (17 m) crossing distance; • 35 mph (55 km/h) speed limit; • During the peak pedestrian hour, 50 pedestrians counted when the major-road volume was 1,000 veh/h; • During the peak vehicle hour, 20 pedestrians counted when the major-road volume was 1,500 veh/h; and • Motorists observed stopping for pedestrians, showing a “high” compliance. The following assumptions were made: • Walking speed is 3.5 ft/s (1.1 m/s) and • Start-up time is 3 seconds. Calculations Figure A-1 provides an overview of the procedure. Tables A-1 and A-2 list the variables needed for the evaluation and the calculations that are to be performed, respectively. The following are the procedures for this example: • Step 1: Select Worksheet. Worksheet 1 is the applicable worksheet for a speed limit of 35 mph (55 km/h). Figure A-4 shows the worksheet with appropriate values for the example. Given that the assumed walking speed and the crosswalk length match the values used to generate one of the figures included in the guidelines, that plot can be used rather than using Worksheet 1 to determine the suggested pedestrian treatment. Figure A-5 shows the plot. • Step 2: Check Minimum Pedestrian Volume. The next step is to determine if a minimum number of pedestrians are present at the site. Because more than 20 pedestrians are crossing the roadway during the peak hour, some form of a pedestrian treatment is suggested. • Step 3: Check Signal Warrant. The minimum number of pedestrians needed on the minor-road approach crossing a four-lane roadway with 1,000 vehicles in the peak hour is 271. The number of crossing pedestrians (50) is less than the 271 value; therefore, a signal is not warranted under the pedestrian volume warrant. Checking the peak vehicle hour provides the same result: a signal is not warranted under the pedestrian volume warrant. • Step 4: Estimate Approach Pedestrian Delay. The average pedestrian delay equation was used to determine the total pedestrian delay. A total pedestrian delay value of 9.8 ped-h was calculated. • Step 5: Select Appropriate Treatment. The motorist com- pliance observed at the site is “high.” With a total pedes- trian delay value of 9.8 ped-h and a motorist compliance of high, the worksheet indicates that an “enhanced/active” device should be considered. Figure A-5 shows the solution using the major roadway volume of 1,000 veh/h and the pedestrian volume of 50. The intersection of these two lines (see circle in Figure A-5) results in the same finding: “enhanced/active” device. The following section lists sug- gested treatments within the categories. Descriptions of Sample Treatments The treatments included in these guidelines are divided into broad classes of elements and devices. Elements are used either uniquely or to supplement a device. A device represents the primary component of a pedestrian treatment. The elements discussed here have been divided into two categories: • Supplemental Signs and Markings. This category is com- posed of applications of signs and markings beyond the stan- dard crosswalk markings and pedestrian crossing signs discussed in the “Crosswalk” category of devices below. Items in this category include advance stop lines and advance signing. • Geometric Elements. This category pertains to crosswalk elements that are permanent installations but are not signs, markings, or devices. These are elements installed based on engineering judgment rather than a warrant and include items such as median refuge islands and curb extensions. The devices discussed here have been divided into five categories: • Crosswalk. This category encompasses standard crosswalk markings and pedestrian crossing signs, as opposed to unmarked crossings. 71

72 WORKSHEET 1: PEAK-HOUR, 35 MPH (55 KM/H) OR LESS Analyst and Site Information Analyst: Maria Analysis Date: 1/19/06 Data Collection Date: 1/19/06 Major Street: Elm Minor Street or Location: 2700 Block Peak Hour: 5 to 6 pm Step 1: Select worksheet (speed reflects posted or statutory speed limit or 85th percentile speed on the major street): a) Worksheet 1 – 35 mph (55 km/h) or less b) Worksheet 2 – exceeds 35 mph (55 km/h), communities with less than 10,000, or where major transit stop exists Step 2: Does the crossing meet minimum pedestrian volumes to be considered for a TCD type of treatment? Peak-hour pedestrian volume (ped/h), Vp 2a 50 If 2a ≥ 20 ped/h, then go to Step 3. If 2a < 20 ped/h, then consider median refuge islands, curb extensions, traffic calming, etc. as feasible. Step 3: Does the crossing meet the pedestrian volume warrant for a traffic signal? Major road volume, total of both approaches during peak hour (veh/h), Vmaj-s 3a 1000 Minimum signal warrant volume for peak hour (use 3a for Vmaj-s), SC SC = (0.00021 Vmaj-s2 – 0.74072 Vmaj-s + 734.125)/0.75 OR [(0.00021 3a2 – 0.74072 3a + 734.125)/0.75] 3b 271 If 3b < 133, then enter 133. If 3b ≥ 133, then enter 3b. 3c 271 If 15th percentile crossing speed of pedestrians is less than 3.5 ft/s (1.1 m/s), then reduce 3c by up to 50 percent; otherwise enter 3c. 3d 271 If 2a ≥ 3d, then the warrant has been met and a traffic signal should be considered if not within 300 ft (91 m) of another traffic signal. Otherwise, the warrant has not been met. Go to Step 4. Step 4: Estimate pedestrian delay. Pedestrian crossing distance, curb to curb (ft), L 4a 56 Pedestrian walking speed (ft/s), Sp 4b 3.5 Pedestrian start-up time and end clearance time (s), ts 4c 3 Critical gap required for crossing pedestrian (s), tc = (L/Sp) + ts OR [(4a/4b) + 4c)] 4d 19 Major road volume, total both approaches or approach being crossed if median refuge island is present during peak hour (veh/h), Vmaj-d 4e 1000 Major road flow rate (veh/s), v = Vmaj-d/3600 OR [4e/3600] 4f 0.2 8 Average pedestrian delay (s/person), dp = (ev tc – v tc – 1) / v OR [ (e4f x 4d – 4f x 4d – 1) / 4f ] 4g 707 Total pedestrian delay (h), Dp = (dp × Vp)/3,600 OR [(4g×2a)/3600] (this is estimated delay for all pedestrians crossing the major roadway without a crossing treatment – assumes 0% compliance). This calculated value can be replaced with the actual total pedestrian delay measured at the site. 4h 9.8 Step 5: Select treatment based upon total pedestrian delay and expected motorist compliance. Expected motorist compliance at pedestrian crossings in region, Comp = high or low 5a high Total Pedestrian Delay, Dp (from 4h) and Motorist Compliance, Comp (from 5a) Treatment Category (see Descriptions of Sample Treatments for examples) Dp ≥ 21.3 h (Comp = high or low) OR 5.3 h ≤ Dp < 21.3 h and Comp = low RED 1.3 h ≤ Dp < 5.3 h (Comp = high or low) OR 5.3 h ≤ Dp < 21.3 h and Comp = high ACTIVE OR ENHANCED Dp < 1.3 h (Comp = high or low) CROSSWALK Figure A-4. Example Problem – Crossing at Elm Street.

• Enhanced. This category includes those devices that enhance the visibility of the crossing location and pedes- trians waiting to cross. Warning signs, markings, or bea- cons in this category are present or active at the crossing location at all times. • Active. Also called “active when present,” this category includes those devices designed to display a warning only when pedestrians are present or crossing the street. • Red. This category includes those devices that display a cir- cular red indication (signal or beacon) to motorists at the pedestrian location. • Signal. This category pertains to traffic control signals. Synopses of Treatments Synopses of selected pedestrian crossing treatments are presented in Table A-3. Categories of Treatments Tables A-4 through A-20 summarize information on exam- ples of selected pedestrian crossing treatments. These sum- maries reflect the more common treatments being used and do not include every device or treatment available. The following summaries are intended to provide general descrip- tions of pedestrian crossing treatments that may be installed at intersections and/or midblock crossings; in all cases, engi- neering judgment should be used in selecting a specific treat- ment for installation. The summaries are based on observations of installed treatments and discussions with traffic engineers who have used or considered using one or more of the components. This selection of pedestrian crossing treatments is not neces- sarily an all-inclusive list, nor is it intended to be. As technol- ogy changes and as more jurisdictions study ways to address the issue of pedestrian crossings, other treatments will likely be discussed and/or tested. Additional Sources of Information on Pedestrian Treatments Additional information on treatments is available from the following references: • Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways. U.S. DOT, FHWA, Washington, D.C., 2003. Available online at http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/, accessed June 2, 2005. • A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets (called the Green Book). AASHTO, Washington, D.C., 2003. • Guide for the Planning, Design, and Operation of Pedestrian Facilities (called the Ped Guide). AASHTO, Washington, D.C., July 2004. • Zegeer, C. V., C. Seiderman, P. Lagerwey, M. Cynecki, M. Ronkin, and R. Schneider. Pedestrian Facilities User Guide – Providing Safety and Mobility. FHWA-RD-01-102, FHWA, Washington, D.C., March 2002. 73 No Treatment Crosswalk E/A* E/A HC, Red LC* Red Signal (proposed for MUTCD) 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 300 600 900 1200 1500 1800 2100 Major Road Volume - Total of Both Approaches (veh/h) *E/A = Enhanced/Active, HC = High Compliance, LC = Low Compliance Pe de st ria n Vo lu m e Cr os si ng M ajo r R oa d ( pe d/h ) Figure A-5. Graphical Solution to Example Problem.

74 Treatment Characteristics Advance Signing ■ Provides additional notification to drivers that a crosswalk is near Advance Stop Line and Sign ■ Vehicle stop line is moved back from the crosswalk Median Refuge Island ■ Accessible pedestrian path within a raised median Raised Crosswalk ■ Crosswalk surface elevated above driving lanes Curb Extension ■ Curb adjacent to crosswalk lengthened by the width of the parking lane Roadway Narrowing ■ Reduced lane widths and/or number of vehicle lanes Markings and Crossing Signs ■ Standard crosswalk markings and pedestrian crossing signs ■ Subject to MUTCD requirements In-Street Pedestrian Crossing Signs ■ Regulatory signs placed in the street ■ Subject to MUTCD requirements High-Visibility Signs and Markings ■ Warning devices placed at or in advance of the pedestrian crossing ■ Subject to MUTCD requirements In-Roadway Warning Lights ■ Amber flashing lights mounted flush to the pavement surface at the crossing location Pedestrian Crossing Flags ■ Square flags on a stick carried by pedestrians ■ Stored in sign-mounted holders on both sides of the street ■ Experimental; not currently in the MUTCD Overhead Flashing Amber Beacons ■ Mounted on mast arms that extend over the roadway or on signposts at the roadside ■ Pedestrian activated ■ Subject to MUTCD requirements Pedestrian Crosswalk Signal ■ Standard traffic signal at a pedestrian crosswalk ■ Pedestrian activated Half Signal ■ Standard traffic signal on major road ■ Experimental; not currently in the MUTCD HAWK Beacon Signal ■ Combination of a beacon flasher and a traffic control signal ■ Dwells in a dark mode; pedestrian activated ■ Used exclusively in Tucson and Pima County, Arizona ■ Experimental; not currently in the MUTCD Pedestrian Beacon ■ Proposed device; not currently in the MUTCD ■ Pedestrian activated Traffic Signal ■ Standard traffic signal at an intersection or midblock location ■ Pedestrian phase typically activated by a pushbutton ■ Subject to MUTCD requirements Table A-3. Synopsis of Crossing Treatments.

75 Advance Signing Advance signing is used to provide additional notification to drivers that a crosswalk is near and pedestrians may be crossing the roadway. Advance signing may be used in a wide variety of situations (intersections, midblock crossings, school-related crosswalks, two-lane or multi-lane roads, and divided or undivided roads), but they are particularly useful at locations where a crosswalk might be unexpected by approaching drivers. Advance Sign with Advisory Speed Plaque for School Crosswalk Advance Sign for Midblock Crossing • MUTCD Description: Non- vehicular signs may be used to alert road users in advance of locations where unexpected entries into the roadway or shared use of the roadway by pedestrians, animals, and other crossing activities might occur. When used in advance of a crossing, non-vehicular warning signs may be supplemented with supplemental plaques with the legend AHEAD, XX FEET, or NEXT XX MILES to provide advance notice to road users of crossing activity. Pedestrian, Bicycle, and School signs and their related supplemental plaques may have a fluorescent yellow- green background with a black legend and border. • MUTCD Guidance: When a fluorescent yellow-green background is used, a systematic approach featuring one background color within a zone or area should be used. The mixing of standard yellow and fluorescent yellow-green backgrounds within a selected site area should be avoided. Non-vehicular signs should be used only at locations where the crossing activity is unexpected or at locations not readily apparent. Table A-4. Supplemental Signs and Markings: Advance Signing.

76 Advance Stop Line and Sign At midblock crossings and signalized or stop- controlled approaches to intersections, the vehicle stop line can be moved farther back from the pedestrian crosswalk for an improved factor of safety and for improved visibility of pedestrians. Advance stop lines are also applicable for non- signalized crosswalks on multi-lane roads to ensure that drivers in all lanes have a clear view of a crossing pedestrian. Advance Stop Line on Multi-lane Approach to Marked Crosswalk Example of Increased Visibility to Pedestrians from Advance Yield Line • FHWA Ped Facilities Users Guide Description: Advance stop lines allow pedestrians and drivers to have a clearer view of each other and more time in which to assess intentions. The effectiveness of this tool depends upon whether motorists are likely to obey the stop line, which varies. In some places, the stop line has been moved back by 15 to 30 ft (4.6 to 9.1 m) relative to the marked crosswalk with considerable safety benefits for pedestrians. • MUTCD Guidance: If used, stop and yield lines should be placed a minimum of 4 ft (1.2 m) in advance of the nearest crosswalk line at controlled intersections. If used at an unsignalized midblock crosswalk, yield lines should be placed adjacent to the Yield Here to Pedestrian sign located 20 to 50 ft (6.1 to 15 m) in advance of the nearest crosswalk line, and parking should be prohibited in the area between the yield line and the crosswalk. Advance Stop Line Table A-5. Supplemental Signs and Markings: Advance Stop Line and Sign.

77 Pedestrian Median Refuge Islands Pedestrian median refuge islands are a roadway design treatment that permits pedestrians to cross one direction of street traffic at a time. Median refuge islands are typically raised above the roadway surface with an accessible pedestrian path. In some cases they are offset to direct the view of crossing pedestrians at the second direction of street traffic. Two-way left-turn lanes and other median treatments that vehicles routinely enter are not considered appropriate refuge for pedestrians. Pedestrian Median Refuge Island Wide Median Refuge Island with Landscaping • AASHTO Green Book Description: A pedestrian median refuge island is near a crosswalk or bicycle path. Raised-curb corner islands and center divisional or channelizing islands can be used as refuge areas. Refuge islands for bicyclists and pedestrians crossing a wide street, for loading or unloading transit riders, or for wheelchair ramps are used primarily in urban areas. • Green Book Guidance: Refuge islands used by bicyclists should be at least 6-ft (1.8-m) wide. Pedestrians and bicyclists should have a clear path through the island with no obstructions such as poles or sign posts. • AASHTO Ped Guide Guidance: Medians and crossing islands should be at least 6-ft (1.8-m) wide so that more than one pedestrian can wait and so that 2-ft (0.61-m) detectable warnings can be provided at both sides of the island. Where practical, a width of 8-ft (2.4-m) may be provided to accommodate wheeled devices and groups of pedestrians and to provide a pedestrian storage area separated by at least 2-ft (0.6-m) from the face of the curb. Table A-6. Geometric Element: Pedestrian Median Refuge Islands.

78 Raised Crosswalks Raised crosswalks are a supplemental element to standard crosswalks. The crosswalk is installed on a surface that is elevated above the surface of the adjacent driving lanes. The elevated surface attracts drivers’ attention and is intended to encourage lower speeds by providing a visual and tactile feedback when approaching the crosswalk. Raised crosswalks may be a constant height for the entire width of the roadway, or they may have gaps to allow bicycles and motorcycles to pass through. Raised Crosswalks with Supplemental Sign and Flashing Beacon Advance Warning Sign for Raised Crosswalk (Not in 2003 MUTCD) • AASHTO Ped Guide Description: Raised crosswalks (or speed tables) are appropriate at midblock locations on local streets, collector roads, and other locations such as airport drop- off and pick-up zones, shopping centers, and campuses. Raised crosswalks can make sidewalks accessible without adding curb ramps. • AASHTO Ped Guide Guidance: Raised crosswalks function as an extension of the sidewalk and allow pedestrians to cross at close to a constant grade, without the need for curb ramps. They are suitable only on low-speed local streets that are not emergency routes. Raised crossings should have a parabolic approach transition, raising the vehicle at least 3-to-6-in (152-mm) above the normal pavement grade. The flat section of the crossing table should be 10-to-12-ft (3.7-m) wide. They should be highly visible and striped as a midblock crossing. The approach should be clearly marked or constructed of a contrasting pavement design with a smooth and stable surface. Detectible warnings should be placed at the curb lines. Raised Crosswalks Table A-7. Geometric Element: Raised Crosswalks.

79 Curb Extensions Curb extensions provide pedestrian refuge and shorten the crossing distance at crosswalks where they are installed. They can also improve the sight distance and sight lines for both pedestrians and motorists. They prevent parked cars from encroaching into the crosswalk area, and they can create adequate space for curb ramps and landings on narrow sidewalks. Curb extensions are used adjacent to on-street parking, where the curb is extended to a distance approximately equal to the width of the parking lane. They can be used at a crossing on one or both sides of the street. Curb Extension with Bus Stop (Also Known as a Bus Bulb) at Midblock Crossing Curb Extension at Intersection • AASHTO Ped Guide Description: Curb extensions reduce the crossing distance for pedestrians, improve sight distance for all users, and slow down traffic. They narrow the street to provide a visual distinction to oncoming motorists that they are approaching a crossing. • AASHTO Ped Guide Guidance: Curb extensions extend approximately 6 ft (1.8 m) from the curb. When used on arterials, the remaining width should be adequate for both motor vehicles and bicycles. They may not be needed or desirable on every leg of an intersection if the street is narrow, parking is not permitted, or the extension would interfere with a bicycle lane or the ability of design vehicles to make a right turn. • TCRP Report 65 Evaluation of Bus Bulbs Guidance: Curb extensions with a bus stop are appropriate where there is on-street parking, high levels of pedestrian activity and/or bus patronage at the bus stop, lower operating speed, and two travel lanes per direction (that allow passing of stopped buses). Conditions that could limit their use include complex drainage patterns, high bicycle traffic, and two- lane streets. Table A-8. Geometric Element: Curb Extensions.

80 Roadway Narrowing Roadway narrowing can be used for lowering vehicle speeds and increasing safety in the areas around pedestrian crossings, as well as redistributing space to other users. Narrowing can occur at selected locations along a corridor or over the entire corridor itself. The physical and visual characteristics of the roadway narrowing encourage drivers to reduce their speeds, which can facilitate pedestrian traffic in the area. Roadway Narrowing on Suburban Collector • FHWA Ped Facilities Users Guide Description: Roadway narrowing can be achieved in several different ways: a) reduce lane width and stripe the excess with a bicycle lane or shoulder, b) remove travel lanes, or c) physically narrow the street by extending sidewalks and landscape areas. This can reduce vehicle speeds along a roadway section and enhance movement and safety for pedestrians. Bicycle travel will also be enhanced and bicyclist safety improved when bicycle lanes are added. • Bicyclists must be safely accommodated. Bike lanes or wide curb lanes are needed if vehicle volumes are high. Road narrowing must also consider truck volumes and access for school buses and emergency services. Before utilizing roadway narrowing, users should evaluate whether narrowing may encourage traffic to divert to other local streets in the neighborhood. Table A-9. Geometric Element: Roadway Narrowing.

81 Markings and Crossing Signs Standard crosswalk markings and pedestrian crossing signs are described in the 2003 Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices, in Section 3B.17 and Section 2C.41, respectively. Markings provide guidance for pedestrians who are crossing roadways by defining and delineating paths on approaches to and within signalized intersections, and on approaches to other intersections where traffic stops. They also alert road users of a pedestrian crossing point across roadways not controlled by signals or Stop signs. At non-intersection locations, markings legally establish the crosswalk. Specific guidance on the use of marked crosswalks is provided in FHWA-RD- 01-075. These FHWA guidelines may be used as a supplement to the guidelines for marked crosswalks presented here. Pedestrian crossing signs (W11-2) may be used to alert road users in advance of locations where unexpected entries into the roadway or shared use of the roadway by pedestrians may occur. W11-2 Crossing Sign with Crosswalk Markings • MUTCD Markings Standard: When crosswalk lines are used, they shall consist of solid white lines that shall not be less than 6 in nor greater than 24 in wide. • MUTCD Markings Guidance: Crosswalks should be no less than 6 ft (1.8 m) wide. Crosswalk lines should extend across the full width of pavement. Crosswalks should be marked at all intersections with “substantial conflict” between vehicles and pedestrians. • FHWA Markings Guidelines: Marked crosswalks alone should not be installed at unsignalized pedestrian crossings when speeds are greater than 40 mph. • MUTCD Signs Standard: When used at crossings, pedestrian crossing signs shall be supplemented with a diagonal downward-pointing arrow plaque showing the location of the crossing. • MUTCD Signs Guidance: When used in advance of a crossing, the W11-2 sign may have a supplemental plaque with the legend AHEAD or XX FEET to provide advance notice to road users of crossing activity. Table A-10. Crosswalk: Markings and Crossing Signs.

82 In-Street Pedestrian Crossing Signs In-Street Pedestrian Crossing signs are regulatory signs placed in the street (on lane edge lines and road centerlines, or in medians). In-Street Pedestrian Crossing signs are described in the 2003 Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices, in Section 2B.12. The In-Street Pedestrian Crossing sign (R1-6 or R1- 6a) may be used to remind road users of laws regarding right of way at an unsignalized pedestrian crossing. The legend STATE LAW may be shown at the top of the sign if applicable. The legends STOP FOR or YIELD TO may be used in conjunction with the appropriate symbol. R1-6 R1-6a In-Street Pedestrian Crossing Signs • MUTCD Standard: The In- Street Pedestrian Crossing sign shall not be used at signalized locations. The STOP FOR legend shall only be used in states where the state law specifically requires that a driver must stop for a pedestrian in a crosswalk. If used, the In-Street Pedestrian Crossing sign shall have a black legend (except for the red STOP or YIELD sign symbols) and border on either a white and/or fluorescent yellow-green background. If the In-Street Pedestrian Crossing sign is placed in the roadway, the sign support shall comply with the breakaway requirements of the latest edition of AASHTO’s specifications. • MUTCD Guidance: If an island is available, the In- Street Pedestrian Crossing sign, if used, should be placed on the island. • MUTCD Option: The In- Street Pedestrian Crossing sign may be used seasonally to prevent damage in winter because of plowing operations and may be removed at night if the pedestrian activity at night is minimal. Table A-11. Enhanced Device: In-Street Pedestrian Crossing Signs.

83 Signs and High-Visibility Markings Signs and high-visibility markings are warning devices placed at or in advance of the pedestrian crossing. They include fluorescent yellow-green pedestrian crossing signs, other crossing signs, high-visibility crosswalk markings, and other devices that attempt to draw attention to the crossing. They are used in much the same way as conventional signs and markings, but the high-visibility characteristics add prominence to the devices. Pedestrian Sign (Not in 2003 MUTCD), High-Visibility Crosswalk Markings, and Reflectorized Bollards • Signs: Enhanced versions of standard signs may have a fluorescent yellow-green background, or they may have a traditional yellow background made of a material that has higher conspicuity. Other signs may be experimental or may use combinations of standard signs and colors. • High-Visibility Markings: High-visibility markings are similar to their conventional counterparts but have a higher conspicuity and/or reflectorization. Markings should be applied using the same guidance as for conventional markings (should be no less than 6 ft [1.8 m] wide, should extend across the full width of pavement, etc.). Fluorescent Yellow-Green Sign with Arrow Plaque, Crosswalk Markings, Raised Pavement Markers, and Example of Experimental Use of In- Street Pedestrian Crossing Sign Table A-12. Enhanced Device: Signs and High-Visibility Markings.

84 In-Roadway Warning Lights In-roadway warning lights at crosswalks provide amber flashing lights that are mounted flush to the pavement surface at the crossing location. The flashing lights can be activated by either a pushbutton or a passive detection technology, such as bollards, video, or microwave sensors. In Section 4L.01, the 2003 MUTCD describes in- roadway warning lights at crosswalks as special types of highway traffic signals installed in the roadway surface to warn road users that they are approaching a condition on or adjacent to the roadway that might not be readily apparent and might require the road users to slow down and/or come to a stop. This includes, but is not necessarily limited to, situations warning of marked school crosswalks, marked midblock crosswalks, marked crosswalks on uncontrolled approaches, marked crosswalks in advance of roundabout intersections, and other roadway situations involving pedestrian crossings. In-Roadway Warning Lights at Midblock Crosswalk • MUTCD General Standard: If used, in-roadway warning lights at crosswalks shall not exceed a height of 0.75 in above the roadway surface. • MUTCD Standard at Crosswalks: In-roadway warning lights at crosswalks shall be installed only at marked crosswalks with applicable warning signs, not at crosswalks controlled by Yield signs, Stop signs, or traffic control signals. They shall be installed along both sides of the crosswalk and shall span its entire length. They shall initiate operation on pedestrian actuation and cease at a predetermined time after the pedestrian actuation or, with passive detection, after the pedestrian clears the crosswalk. They shall display a flashing yellow signal indication when actuated, the flash rate of which shall be at least 50, but not more than 60, flashes per minute. There shall be at least one in-roadway light per lane of roadway, with a minimum of two lights for a one-lane one-way roadway and a minimum of three lights for a two-lane roadway. They shall be installed outside the crosswalk, within 3 ft (1 m) of the crosswalk. In-Roadway Warning Light Table A-13. Active Device: In-Roadway Warning Lights.

85 Pedestrian Crossing Flags Pedestrian crossing flags are flags of various colors (typically orange, yellow, or fluorescent yellow- green) mounted on a stick that is held by pedestrians crossing or waiting to cross the street. The flags are typically stored in sign-mounted holders on both sides of the street at crossing locations. Pedestrian Crossing Flags Stored in Sign- Mounted Holder • Pedestrian Usage: Supplemental plaques may be added at or near the flag holders to explain to pedestrians the proper usage of the flags. • Maintenance: Depending on the location where flags are used, flags will need to be replaced periodically due to normal wear and tear, theft, and/or vandalism. The frequency of replacement depends largely on the pedestrian volumes and weather conditions at the site. A supplemental plaque may be installed near the flag holder as a warning against theft. Supplemental Usage and Anti-theft Plaques Table A-14. Active Device: Pedestrian Crossing Flags.

86 Overhead Flashing Amber Beacons Overhead flashing amber beacons are mounted on mast arms that extend over the roadway at or in advance of the crossing location. The flashing beacons can be activated by either a pushbutton or a passive detection technology, such as bollards, video, or microwave sensors. Continuously flashing beacons are not included in this category; they would be more appropriately included in the “Enhanced” category of devices. The alternate flashing is preferred by some agencies over the simultaneous flashing. A strobe pattern is also achievable with light-emitting diode (LED) modules and advance transportation controllers. Overhead Flashing Amber Beacons with Pedestrian Crossing Sign (Current Version of Sign Does Not Include Crosswalk Markings) • MUTCD Standard: A warning beacon shall consist of one or more signal sections of a standard traffic signal face with a flashing circular yellow signal indication in each section. It shall be used only to supplement an appropriate warning or regulatory sign or marker. The beacon shall not be included within the border of the sign except for School Speed Limit sign beacons. The clearance above the pavement for overhead beacons shall be at least 15-ft (4.6-m) but not more than 19-ft (5.8-m). • MUTCD Guidance: Warning beacons should be operated only during those hours when the condition or regulation exists. Section 4K.03 of the 2003 MUTCD mentions “emphasis for midblock crosswalks” as a specific application of flashing beacons. Overhead Flashing Amber Beacons with Supplemental Pedestrian Crossing Sign (Older Version of Sign) and Mast-Arm Mounted “PED XING” Sign (Not in 2003 MUTCD) Table A-15. Active Device: Overhead Flashing Amber Beacons.

87 Pedestrian Crosswalk Signal A pedestrian crosswalk signal is a special traffic control signal used in Los Angeles to encourage pedestrians to use a crosswalk and to emphasize to vehicles the importance and necessity of yielding to pedestrians in the crosswalk. A pedestrian crosswalk signal has been used in Los Angeles to facilitate pedestrian crossings when other traffic signal warrants were not met. The pedestrian phase for a pedestrian crosswalk signal is activated by a pushbutton. The cycle for vehicles consists of a flashing red indication preceded by a yellow clearance interval, similar to a standard traffic control signal. A pedestrian crosswalk signal dwells in steady green (ball or arrow). It is generally accompanied by a supplemental plaque indicating the signal is intended for pedestrians using the crosswalk and WAIT HERE pavement markings. • Los Angeles Pedestrian Crosswalk Signal: For Los Angeles, a signal at a midblock crossing can be authorized for the purpose of consolidating midblock crossings to a single, preferred point, when the street is at least 50 ft (15 m) wide, the nearest controlled crossing is at least 300 ft (91 m) away, and the marked crosswalk requirements are satisfied (which includes a criteria of 40 or more pedestrians during peak pedestrian hours). Example of Los Angeles Pedestrian Crosswalk Signal with Supplemental Signing (Not in 2003 MUTCD) on Mast Arm (Note Green Arrow) Dwells in Green Arrow Upon Activation, Steady Yellow for 3 to 6 s Flashing Red during Pedestrian Interval Example of Phasing for Pedestrian Crosswalk Signal Table A-16. Red Device: Pedestrian Crosswalk Signal.

88 Half Signals A half signal (also known as an intersection pedestrian signal) is a standard traffic signal with red, yellow, and green indications that is located at an intersecting cross street with Stop control. The pedestrian phase for a half signal is typically activated by a pushbutton. In the United States, most half signals dwell in steady green, whereas most half signals in British Columbia dwell in flashing green. Half signals are experimental and are not currently included in the MUTCD. Permission for experimentation is needed. Intersection Pedestrian Signal (Half Signal) • Guidance: Half signals are used to provide signal control for a pedestrian crossing the major street while minimizing delay for major street traffic by retaining Stop sign control on the minor street. This treatment has been used at locations where there is heavy pedestrian demand to cross the major street but the side street traffic on the minor approach is light. The lack of signal control on the side street does not attract more traffic to the street as conventional intersection signals would. • Installation and Operation: The cost of installation is significant. Drivers on side streets may be confused about right-of-way assignment: the side street right-of-way relies on gaps in main street traffic to enter or cross the main street. If the crosswalk is clear, drivers on side streets may use the gap created by the signal to proceed through the intersection. This treatment has been tested in several cities including Portland, Oregon; Seattle, Washington; and Fairfax, Virginia. Stop Sign on Minor Approach Signal Heads on Major Approaches Table A-17. Red Device: Half Signals.

89 HAWK A HAWK beacon signal provides yellow and red indications. The current configuration for a HAWK is two red lenses above a yellow lens in a “Mickey Mouse Ears” format. The HAWK beacon signal, used exclusively in Tucson and Pima County, Arizona, dwells in a dark mode until activated by a pedestrian by means of a pushbutton. The HAWK is currently not included in the MUTCD. Permission for experimentation is needed. HAWK Signal Close-Up of HAWK Signal Head • Description: The objective of a HAWK (high-intensity activated crosswalk) signal is to stop vehicles to allow pedestrians to cross while also allowing vehicles to proceed as soon as the pedestrians have passed. It is a combination of a beacon flasher and a traffic control signal. This application provides a pedestrian crossing without signal control for the side street. • Operation: The inclusion of the alternating flashing red permits stop-and-go vehicle operations after a pedestrian has cleared the crosswalk. • Observations: Drivers are more likely to stop for a device that displays a red indication. Driver education has been an active component in those communities using a HAWK signal. Confusion may result from the dark beacon signal display, as drivers may interpret it as a power outage; however, that has not been a problem where implemented. Table A-18. Red Device: HAWK Beacon Signals.

90 Proposed Pedestrian Beacon A pedestrian beacon is a proposed special highway traffic control signal used at some locations for pedestrians waiting to cross or crossing the street. A pedestrian beacon is proposed to be considered for installation at a midblock location that does not meet other traffic signal warrants to facilitate pedestrian crossings. The pedestrian phase for a pedestrian beacon would be activated by a pedestrian. The red portion of the cycle for vehicles consists of a sequence of a steady red indication (during the pedestrian crossing interval) followed by flashing red indications (during the pedestrian clearance interval). This device has been suggested to be included in future editions of the MUTCD. Dark until Activated Flashing Yellow for 3 to 6 s Steady Yellow for 3 to 6 s Steady Red during Pedestrian Interval Alternating Flashing Red during Pedestrian Clearance Interval Example of Phase Sequence for a Pedestrian Beacon • Proposed Guidance for the MUTCD: If a traffic control signal is not justified under the signal warrants of Chapter 4C and if gaps in traffic are not adequate to permit reasonably safe pedestrian crossings, or if the speed for vehicles approaching on the major street is too high to permit reasonably safe street crossings for pedestrians, or if pedestrian delay is excessive, installing a pedestrian traffic control signal should be considered. • Proposed Sign to Accompany a Pedestrian Beacon: Table A-19. Red Device: Pedestrian Beacon.

91 Traffic Control Signals Standard traffic signals and warrants for their consideration are described in the MUTCD. In particular, Warrant 4 of the 2003 edition deals with traffic signals for pedestrians. The pedestrian volume signal warrant is intended for application where the traffic volume on a major street is so heavy that pedestrians experience excessive delay in crossing the major street. A signal may not be needed at the study location if adjacent coordinated traffic control signals consistently provide gaps of adequate length for pedestrians to cross the street. Traffic Control Signal with Pedestrian Crossing Sign (Current Version of Sign Does Not Include Crosswalk Markings) Pedestrian Using Pushbutton Detector to Activate WALK Indication at Traffic Control Signal • MUTCD Standard: The need for a traffic control signal at an intersection or a midblock crossing shall be considered if an engineering study finds that the appropriate criteria are met. This warrant shall not be applied at locations where the distance to the nearest traffic signal is less than 300 ft (91 m) unless the proposed signal will not restrict the progressive movement of traffic. • MUTCD Guidance: If at an intersection, the signal should be traffic actuated and include pedestrian detectors. If installed within a signal system, the signal should be coordinated. If at a midblock crossing, the signal should be pedestrian actuated, parking and other obstructions should be prohibited for at least 100 ft (31 m) in advance of and at least 20 ft (6.1 m) beyond the crosswalk, and the installation should include standard signs and pavement markings. Table A-20. Signal: Traffic Control Signals.

• Lalani, N., and ITE Pedestrian and Bicycle Task Force. Alternative Treatments for At-Grade Pedestrian Crossings. ITE Informational Report, ITE, Washington, D.C., 2001. • Zegeer, C., J. Stuart, and H. Huang. Safety Effects of Marked vs. Unmarked Crosswalks at Uncontrolled Crossing Loca- tions. FHWA, Washington, D.C., 2001. • PedSafe: Pedestrian Safety Guide and Countermeasure Selection System. http://www.walkinginfo.org/pedsafe/ Illustrations of Guidelines Graphs were generated to illustrate the guidelines for the readers and are included as Figures A-6 through A-19. These graphs should be used only when the major-road speed, the pedestrian walking speed, and the crossing distance are matched to the value presented at the top of the graph. For other situations, the reader should use the equations listed in the worksheets. 92 No Treatment Crosswalk E/A* E/A HC, Red LC* Red Signal (proposed for MUTCD) 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 300 600 900 1200 1500 1800 2100 Major Road Volume - Total of Both Approaches (Veh/h) *E/A = Enhanced/Active, HC = High Compliance, LC = Low Compliance Pe de st ria n Vo lu m e Cr o ss in g M ajo r R o ad (p ed /h ) No Treatment Crosswalk E/A* E/A HC, Red LC* Red Signal (proposed for MUTCD) 0 100 200 300 400 500 300 600 900 1200 1500 1800 2100 Major Road Volume - Total of Both Approaches (veh/h) *E/A = Enhanced/Active, HC = High Compliance, LC = Low Compliance Pe de st ria n Vo lu m e Cr o ss in g M ajo r R o ad (p ed /h ) Figure A-6. Guidelines Plot, 34 ft (10.4 m) Pavement, <–35 mph (55 km/h), 3.5 ft/s (1.1 m/s) Walking Speed. Figure A-7. Guidelines Plot, 34 ft (10.4 m) Pavement, <–35 mph (55 km/h), 3.0 ft/s (0.9 km/h) Walking Speed.

93 No Treatment Crosswalk E/A* E/A HC, Red LC* Red Signal (proposed for MUTCD) 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 300 600 900 1200 1500 1800 2100 Major Road Volume - Total of Both Approaches (veh/h) *E/A = Enhanced/Active, HC = High Compliance, LC = Low Compliance Pe de st ria n Vo lu m e Cr os si ng M ajo r R oa d (pe d/ h) No Treatment Crosswalk E/A* E/A HC, Red LC* Red Signal (proposed for MUTCD) 0 100 200 300 400 500 1 300 600 900 1200 1500 1800 2100 Major Road Volume - Total of Both Approaches (veh/h) *E/A = Enhanced/Active, HC = High Compliance, LC = Low Compliance Pe de st ria n Vo lu m e Cr o ss in g M ajo r R o ad (p ed /h ) Figure A-8. Guidelines Plot, 56 ft (17 m) Pavement, <–35 mph (55 km/h), 3.5 ft/s (1.1 m/s) Walking Speed. Figure A-9. Guidelines Plot, 56 ft (17 m) Pavement, <–35 mph (55 km/h), 3.0 ft/s (0.9 m/s) Walking Speed.

94 No Treatment Crosswalk E/A* E/A HC, Red LC* Red Signal (proposed for MUTCD) 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 300 600 900 1200 1500 1800 2100 Major Road Volume - Total of Both Approaches (veh/h) *E/A = Enhanced/Active, HC = High Compliance, LC = Low Compliance Pe de st ria n Vo lu m e Cr o ss in g M ajo r R o ad (p ed /h ) No Treatment E/A* E/A HC, Red LC* Red Signal (proposed for MUTCD) 0 100 200 300 400 500 1 300 600 900 1200 1500 1800 2100 Major Road Volume - Total of Both Approaches (veh/h) *E/A = Enhanced/Active, HC = High Compliance, LC = Low Compliance Pe de st ria n Vo lu m e Cr o ss in g M ajo r R o ad (p ed /h ) Figure A-10. Guidelines Plot, 50 ft (17 m) Pavement, <–35 mph (55 km/h), 3.5 ft/s (1.1 m/s) Walking Speed. Figure A-11. Guidelines Plot, 50 ft (17 m) Pavement, >35 mph (55 km/h), 3.5 ft/s (1.1 m/s) Walking Speed.

95 No Treatment Crosswalk E/A* E/A HC, Red LC* Red Signal (proposed for MUTCD) 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 300 600 900 1200 1500 1800 2100 Major Road Volume - Total of Both Approaches (veh/h) *E/A = Enhanced/Active, HC = High Compliance, LC = Low Compliance Pe de st ria n V ol um e Cr o ss in g M ajo r R oa d (pe d/ h) No Treatment E/A* E/A HC, Red LC* Red Signal (proposed for MUTCD) 0 100 200 300 400 500 300 600 900 1200 1500 1800 2100 Major Road Volume - Total of Both Approaches (veh/h) *E/A = Enhanced/Active, HC = High Compliance, LC = Low Compliance Pe de st ria n Vo lu m e Cr o ss in g M ajo r R o ad (p ed /h ) Figure A-12. Guidelines Plot, 72 ft (22 m) Pavement, <–35 mph (55 km/h), 3.5 ft/s (1.1 m/s) Walking Speed. Figure A-13. Guidelines Plot, 72 ft (22 m) Pavement, >35 mph (55 km/h), 3.5 ft/s (1.1 m/s) Walking Speed.

96 No Treatment Crosswalk E/A* E/A HC, Red LC* Red Signal (proposed for MUTCD) 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 1 300 600 900 1200 1500 1800 2100 Major Road Volume - Total of Both Approaches (veh/h) *E/A = Enhanced/Active, HC = High Compliance, LC = Low Compliance Pe de st ria n Vo lu m e Cr o ss in g M ajo r R o ad (p ed /h ) No Treatment Crosswalk E/A* E/A HC, RED LC* Red Signal (proposed for MUTCD) 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0.5 300 600 900 1200 1500 1800 2100 Major Road Volume - One Approach (veh/h) *E/A = Enhanced/Active, HC = High Compliance, LC = Low Compliance Pe de st ria n Vo lu m e Cr o ss in g M ajo r R o ad (p ed /h ) Figure A-14. Guidelines Plot, 66 ft (20 m) Pavement, <–35 mph (55 km/h), 3.5 ft/s (1.1 m/s) Walking Speed. Figure A-15. Guidelines Plot, Divided Roadway with Pedestrian Refuge Island, Crossing 36 ft (11 m) Pavement, <–35 mph (55 km/h), 3.5 ft/s (1.1 m/s) Walking Speed (Plot Assumed 50/50 Volume Split for Signal Curve).

97 No Treatment E/A* E/A HC, Red LC* Red Signal (proposed for MUTCD) 0 100 200 300 400 500 300 600 900 1200 1500 1800 2100 Major Road Volume - Total of Both Approaches (veh/h) *E/A = Enhanced/Active, HC = High Compliance, LC = Low Compliance Pe de st ria n Vo lu m e Cr os si ng M ajo r R oa d (pe d/ h) No Treatment E/A* E/A HC, RED LC* Red Signal (proposed for MUTCD) 0 100 200 300 400 500 300 600 900 1200 1500 1800 2100 Major Road Volume - One Approach (veh/h) *E/A = Enhanced/Active, HC = High Compliance, LC = Low Compliance Pe de st ria n Vo lu m e Cr o ss in g M ajo r R o ad (p ed /h ) Figure A-16. Guidelines Plot, 66 ft (20 m) Pavement, >35 mph (55 km/h), 3.5 ft/s (1.1 m/s) Walking Speed. Figure A-17. Guidelines Plot, Divided Roadway with Pedestrian Refuge Island, Crossing 36 ft (11 m) Pavement, >35 mph (55 km/h), 3.5 ft/s (1.1 m/s) Walking Speed (Plot Assumed 50/50 Volume Split for Signal Curve).

98 No Treatment E/A* E/A HC, Red LC* Red Signal (proposed for MUTCD) 0 100 200 300 400 500 300 600 900 1200 1500 1800 2100 Major Road Volume - Total of Both Approaches (veh/h) *E/A = Enhanced/Active, HC = High Compliance, LC = Low Compliance Pe de st ria n Vo lu m e Cr o ss in g M ajo r R o ad (p ed /h ) No Treatment E/A* E/A HC, RED LC* Red Signal (proposed for MUTCD) 0 100 200 300 400 500 300 600 900 1200 1500 1800 2100 Major Road Volume - One Approach (veh/h) *E/A = Enhanced/Active, HC = High Compliance, LC = Low Compliance Pe de st ria n Vo lu m e Cr o ss in g M ajo r R o ad (p ed /h ) Figure A-18. Guidelines Plot, 100 ft (31 m) Pavement, >35 mph (55 km/h), 3.5 ft/s (1.1 m/s) Walking Speed. Figure A-19. Guidelines Plot, Divided Roadway with Pedestrian Refuge Island, Crossing 44 ft (13.4 m) Pavement, >35 mph (55 km/h), 3.5 ft/s (1.1 m/s) Walking Speed (Plot Assumed 50/50 Volume Split for Signal Curve).

Next: Appendixes B Through O »
Improving Pedestrian Safety at Unsignalized Crossings Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

TRB's Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP) and National Cooperative Highway Research Program have jointly produced and published Improving Pedestrian Safety at Unsignalized Crossings. The product, which can be referred to as TCRP Report 112 or NCHRP Report 562, examines selected engineering treatments to improve safety for pedestrians crossing high-volume and high-speed roadways at unsignalized locations. The report presents the edited final report and Appendix A. TCRP Web-Only Document 30/NCHRP Web-Only Document 91 (Pedestrian Safety at Unsignalized Crossings: Appendices B to O) contains the remaining appendixes of the contractor's final report.

A summary of TCRP Report 112/NCHRP Report 562 as published in the July-August 2007 issue of the TR News is available online.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!