National Academy of Sciences | 150 Year Anniversary

Questions? Call 800-624-6242

| Items in cart [0]

The National Academies Press

Rights & Permissions

topleft topright

NCHRP Report 674: Crossing Solutions at Roundabouts and Channelized Turn Lanes for Pedestrians with Vision Disabilities (2011)
National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP)

Citation Manager

Rodegerdts, Lee, Guth, David, Long, Richard, Bentzen, Billie Louise, Schroeder, Bastian, Emerson, Robert Wall, Hughes, Ronald, Rouphail, Nagui, Cunningham, Christopher, Salamati, Katy, Kim, Dae, Barlow, Janet, Myers, Ed, Transportation Research Board. "Synthesis of Approach." NCHRP Report 674: Crossing Solutions at Roundabouts and Channelized Turn Lanes for Pedestrians with Vision Disabilities. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2011.

Please select a format:

BibTeX EndNote RefMan


Page
82
bottomleft bottomright
Page
82
Front Matter (R1-R11)
Summary (1-9)
Safety Is Not Synonymous with Access (10-10)
Scope of Work (11-11)
Content of This Report (12-12)
Facility Design (13-14)
Locating the Crosswalk (15-15)
The U.S. Access Board and ADA (16-16)
Midblock Crossings and Conventional Intersections (17-18)
Blind Pedestrian Crossing Experiments (19-19)
Driver Information Treatments (20-20)
Crosswalk Geometric Modification (21-21)
Signalization Treatments with APS (22-22)
Grade-Separated Crossing (23-23)
Participants (24-24)
Participant Questionnaires (25-25)
Identification and Selection of Treatments (26-26)
Site Selection (27-27)
Selection of Treatment Sites (28-33)
Crossing Performance Characteristics (34-34)
Opportunity Utilization Criterion (35-35)
Event Definitions (36-36)
Performance Measures (37-38)
Performance Measure Example (39-39)
Research Hypotheses (40-42)
Crossing Performance Results (43-44)
Participant Feedback (45-45)
Impact on Vehicular Traffic (46-46)
Study Overview (47-47)
Crossing Performance Results (48-49)
Impact on Vehicular Traffic (50-50)
Crossing Performance Results (51-54)
Participant Feedback (55-55)
Compliance with Signal Indications (56-57)
Impact on Vehicular Traffic (58-58)
Summary of Results (59-61)
Introduction (62-62)
Results (63-66)
Model Comparison (67-68)
Model Application (69-72)
Extension to Safety Modeling (73-73)
Applying the Framework to Simulation (74-77)
Simulation-Based Analysis of Signalized Crosswalks (78-80)
Discussion (81-81)
Synthesis of Approach (82-82)
Implications of Field Study Results (83-84)
Policy Implications (85-85)
The Impact of Vehicle Speed (86-86)
Inter-Participant Variability (87-87)
Learning Effect and O&M Training (88-88)
Confidence in Decision-Making (89-89)
Viability of Interventions as a Measure of Risk (90-90)
Driver Yielding and Enforcement (91-91)
Channelized Turn Lanes (92-92)
Two-Lane Roundabouts (93-93)
Future Research Needs (94-96)
References (97-98)
Appendix A - Detailed Results (99-100)
Crossing Statistics for CTL Site and Treatments (101-107)
Channelized Turn Lane Results Summary (108-109)
Crossing Statistics for Crosswalk (110-114)
Golden, CO, Single-Lane Roundabout Summary (115-115)
Site Description (116-117)
Crossing Statistics (118-119)
Discussion (120-120)
Pretest Pedestrian Behavior at the RCW (121-122)
Posttest Pedestrian Behavior at the RCW (123-123)
Performance Statistics for RCW (124-126)
RCW Summary (127-127)
Pretest Pedestrian Behavior at the PHB Crosswalk (128-129)
Posttest Blind Pedestrian Behavior at the PHB Crosswalk (130-132)
Performance Statistics at the PHB Crosswalk (133-135)
Driver Behavior at the PHB (136-137)
PHB Crosswalk Summary (138-139)
Appendix N - IRB Approval and Consent Forms (140-140)
Abbreviations used without definitions in TRB publications (141-141)

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 82
82 CHAPTER 7 Interpretation and Application This chapter presents an interpretation of the findings of This framework allows the analyst to isolate different com- research performed under NCHRP Project 3-78A in the con- ponents of the crossing task at crosswalks. Any treatments text of application to engineering practice. The chapter ini- intended to improve the accessibility are specifically targeted to tially presents a synthesis of the study approach, followed by one or more of the criteria. On the basis of these four analysis a summary of the field studies performed during this project. dimensions, the report describes the development and imple- It then discusses specific implications for facility design and mentation of a set of performance measures. The performance accessibility considerations at the three tested facility types: measures include the probability of encountering crossable channelized turn lanes, single-lane roundabouts, and two- gaps, P(CG_ENC), and yields, P(Y_ENC), and the probability lane roundabouts. The chapter concludes with a discussion of utilizing these crossing opportunities, P(GO|CG) and of future research needs and recommendations for follow-up P(GO|Y). These performance measures were used in field work to this project. studies to quantify the first two accessibility criteria. The per- formance measures are further hypothesized to affect criteria 3 and 4, the delay and safety experienced by the pedestrian Synthesis of Approach during the crossing. Chapter 4 of this report provides detailed The results of NCHRP Project 3-78A have three principal descriptions and definitions of all performance measures. components: (1) the formulation of a framework for describ- The present research effort serves to introduce a structured ing accessibility, (2) field study results of blind pedestrian cross- and measurable framework for quantifying the principal ing studies including treatment installation, and (3) approaches operational parameters of accessibility. for extension of the findings to other locations. Second, the research conducted a total of 11 field studies at First, the project devised an analysis framework for assess- multiple test locations involving crossing trials of blind study ing the accessibility and usability of different crossings to participants. These included four studies at an intersection pedestrians who are blind. While the framework was developed with CTLs, two of which were posttests after installing sound in this project in light of specific challenges to this group of strips, lane delineators, and a pedestrian-actuated flashing pedestrians, it has broader application to other pedestrian pop- beacon (one location only). Four studies were performed at ulations. The accessibility framework quantifies the crossing two-lane roundabout crosswalks. Again, two were posttests performance at a tested location in four dimensions: after installing a raised crosswalk and a pedestrian hybrid beacon at the two studied crosswalks. The remaining three 1. Crossing opportunity criterion studies were performed at two single-lane roundabouts. One ­ Are there sufficient crossing opportunities in the form of the single-lane roundabouts was evaluated in a pretest and of yields or crossable gaps? posttest design, but without treatment installation, to test for 2. Opportunity utilization criterion a learning effect in study participants with repeated exposure. ­ Are the crossing opportunities utilized by the pedestrian? A twelfth dataset, originally collected for a prior research 3. Delay criterion effort, was also included in the analysis. This dataset was also ­ Is a crossing opportunity taken within a reasonable time? for a single-lane roundabout. In total the field studies evalu- 4. Safety criterion ated approximately 3,300 individual crossing attempts by ­ Does the crossing interaction occur without a significant 56 different blind study participants in 12 studies at five degree of risk? different sites.