Cover Image

Not for Sale

View/Hide Left Panel
Click for next page ( 27

The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement

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 26
26 shows the questionnaires used during the debriefing process ity fields, the research team represented a diverse and qualified for different sites. group for this task. Therefore, an independent internal team survey was conducted to weigh different treatment options in terms of their perceived effectiveness, cost, and applicability Identification and Selection to the different facility types. of Treatments This section describes the process used by the research Internal Team Survey team to collectively arrive at a set of treatments to be experi- mentally applied at selected single- and two-lane roundabouts The internal team survey was intended to reduce the long and CTLs. The objective of the treatments was to improve list of treatments to a short list to move forward in the field- access for blind pedestrians. The definition for what consti- testing stage of the project. A survey tool was developed to tutes an accessible crossing and the performance evaluation gather the input of all members of the research team. The framework used in the analysis is presented in Chapter 4. The survey tool and team results are provided as Appendix C. treatment selection process combined information on treat- Each member of the research team evaluated each of the ment effectiveness available in the literature and the applied potential treatments in terms of (1) the extent to which each research and practical experience of those on the project team. of the treatments would have an impact on the likelihood Given the operational similarities of roundabouts and CTLs of gap detection (estimated separately for blind and sighted discussed in Chapter 1, comparable treatment strategies were pedestrians), (2) the likelihood of having an impact on yield hypothesized to enhance accessibility at both facility types. detection, and (3) the likelihood of drivers yielding to pedes- Accessibility for blind pedestrians at these types of facilities trians. These are referred to in the survey as behavioral attri- butes associated with treatments. Estimates were also provided is a function of (1) traffic conditions associated with a low for the extent to which each potential treatment was believed occurrence of naturally occurring crossable gaps, (2) blind to have an impact on performance (i.e., both the delay and risk pedestrians' ability to detect the presence of naturally occur- experienced by blind and sighted pedestrians), as well the ring gaps, (3) the likelihood of motorists yielding to pedes- effect on vehicular traffic. Estimates were also provided for the trians, and (4) the ability of blind pedestrians to reliably perceived applicability of treatments for implementation at detect those yield events. Given the dynamic nature of the single- and two-lane roundabouts and at CTLs. pedestrianvehicle interaction, the temporal efficiency is Treatments were divided into six categories following the another critical aspect since gap duration and driver patience discussion in Chapter 2: driver information treatments, traf- (in yielding) are limited. fic calming treatments, pedestrian information treatments, In addition to the above conditions for crossing, equivalent crosswalk geometry modification, signalization with APS, access to these types of facilities by blind and sighted pedestri- and grade separation. ans will also be a function of how effectively the blind pedes- The survey results suggested that most driver informa- trian can (1) locate the crosswalk, (2) correctly align for cross- tion treatments and traffic calming treatments were judged ing, and (3) maintain alignment while crossing. Failures of to have no substantial impact on blind pedestrians' ability to facilities to support these requirements can result in (a) an detect gaps and/or yielding vehicles. However, these treat- increase in the total pedestrian travel time associated with ments were generally believed to be beneficial to sighted pedes- crossing, (b) exposure to risk by crossing at an inappropriate trians and were believed to be applicable to single-lane round- (i.e., unmarked) crossing location, or (c) both an increase in about and CTL crossings, but to a lesser extent to two-lane crossing time and exposure to risk associated with veering roundabouts. While they weren't believed to affect detection during the crossing. While the focus of the experimental tri- of crossing opportunities, their perceived impact on increasing als in this research was on the actual crossing task, these other frequency of crossing opportunities (more yields) was deemed aspects are discussed in general terms. beneficial. At a relatively low cost and perceived low impact to The long list of treatments given in Chapter 2 represents vehicular operations, one treatment in each of these categories all treatments that were deemed to have some potential in was considered for further testing: a pedestrian-actuated flash- improving the accessibility of roundabouts and CTLs. It was ing beacon and a raised crosswalk. beyond the scope of this project to test all of these treatments For pedestrian information treatments, members of the at multiple facility types. Consequently, a process had to be research team hypothesized mixed effects on gap and yield devised to arrive at a short list of treatments to propose for detection, although generally higher effectiveness than treat- further testing. Having completed the literature review on ments in the previous category. Estimated effectiveness for treatment types and effectiveness and having extensive prior blind pedestrians was moderate for surface treatments intended research and field knowledge in the engineering and accessibil- to generate additional acoustic cues and higher for more