National Academies Press: OpenBook

Safety at Midblock Pedestrian Signals (2023)

Chapter: References

« Previous: Chapter 6 - Conclusions and Recommendations
Page 44
Suggested Citation:"References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2023. Safety at Midblock Pedestrian Signals. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26898.
×
Page 44
Page 45
Suggested Citation:"References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2023. Safety at Midblock Pedestrian Signals. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26898.
×
Page 45
Page 46
Suggested Citation:"References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2023. Safety at Midblock Pedestrian Signals. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26898.
×
Page 46
Page 47
Suggested Citation:"References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2023. Safety at Midblock Pedestrian Signals. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26898.
×
Page 47
Page 48
Suggested Citation:"References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2023. Safety at Midblock Pedestrian Signals. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26898.
×
Page 48
Page 49
Suggested Citation:"References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2023. Safety at Midblock Pedestrian Signals. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26898.
×
Page 49
Page 50
Suggested Citation:"References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2023. Safety at Midblock Pedestrian Signals. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26898.
×
Page 50

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.

44 References 1. Governors Highway Safety Association. Pedestrian Traffic Fatalities by State. 2020. www.ghsa.org/sites/ default/files/2021-03/Ped%20Spotlight%202021%20FINAL%203.23.21.pdf. 2. FHWA. Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. 2009. http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/pdfs/2009r1r2/ pdf_index.htm. 3. Fitzpatrick, K., S. Turner, M. Brewer, P. Carlson, B. Ullman, N. Trout, E. S. Park, J. Whitacre, N. Lalani, and D. Lord. TCRP Report 112/NCHRP Report 562: Improving Pedestrian Safety at Unsignalized Crossings. Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, DC, 2006. https://doi.org/10.17226/ 13962. 4. Hourdos, J. Assessing the Impact of Pedestrian-Activated Crossing Systems. Final Report 2020-13. Minnesota Department of Transportation, 2020. 5. Johnson, T. R. Safety at Half-Signal Intersections in Portland, Oregon. MS thesis. Portland State University, 2015. 6. Wiatrak, A. School–Pedestrian Crosswalk Signals at Intersections: A Quantified Evaluation of Performance. Traffic and Transportation Division of the Seattle Engineering Department, 1974. 7. Petzold, R. G., and R. Nawrocki. Urban Intersection Improvements for Pedestrian Safety: Volume V—Evaluation of Alternatives to Full Signalization at Pedestrian Crossings. FHWA-RD-77-146. FHWA, USDOT, 1977. 8. Thomas, D. Half/Pedestrian Signal Report. Intranet Quorum IMA00421970. 2010. 9. Canadian Institute of Transportation Engineers. A Technical Review of Pedestrian Signals in Canada. 2006. 10. Fitzpatrick, K., and E. S. Park. Safety Effectiveness of the HAWK Pedestrian Crossing Treatment. FHWA- HRT-10-042. FHWA, 2010. 11. Zegeer, C., R. Srinivasan, B. Lan, D. Carter, S. Smith, C. Sundstrom, N. Thirsk, C. Lyon, B. Persaud, J. Zegeer, E. Ferguson, and R. Van Houten. NCHRP Research Report 841: Development of Crash Modification Factors for Uncontrolled Pedestrian Crossing Treatments. Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC, 2017. 12. Fitzpatrick, K., M. J. Cynecki, M. P. Pratt, E. S. Park, and M. E. Beckley. Evaluation of Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons on Arizona Highways. SPR-756. Phoenix, AZ: ADOT, 2019. https://apps.azdot.gov/files/ADOT Library/publications/project_reports/pdf/spr756.pdf. 13. Hauer, E. Signal Timing and Midblock Crossings. ITE Journal, December 2020. 14. Zegeer, C. V., R. J. Stewart, H. H. Huang, P. A. Lagerwey, J. Feaganes, and B. J. Campbell. Safety Effects of Marked versus Unmarked Crosswalks at Uncontrolled Locations: Final Report and Recommended Guidelines. FHWA-HRT-04-100. McLean, VA: FHWA, 2005. www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/research/safety/04100/. 15. Kothuri, S. Exploring Pedestrian Responsive Traffic Signal Timing Strategies in Urban Areas. PhD thesis. Portland State University, 2014. 16. Turner, S., I. Sener, M. Martin, S. Das, E. Shipp, R. Hampshire, K. Fitzpatrick, L. Molnar, R. Wijesundera, M. Colety, and S. Robinson. Synthesis of Methods for Estimating Pedestrian and Bicyclist Exposure to Risk at Areawide Levels and on Specific Transportation Facilities. FHWA-SA-17-041. FHWA, 2017. 17. Schneider, R. J., T. Henry, M. F. Mitman, L. Stonehill, and J. Koehler. Development and Application of Volume Model for Pedestrian Intersections in San Francisco, California. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 2299, no. 1 (January 2012): pp. 65–78. https://doi.org/10.3141/2299-08. 18. Griswold, J. B., A. Medury, R. J. Schneider, D. Amos, A. Li, and O. Grembek. A Pedestrian Exposure Model for the California State Highway System. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 2673, no. 4 (April 2019): pp. 941–950. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361198119837235. 19. Schneider, R. J., A. Schmitz, and X. Qin. Development and Validation of a Seven-County Regional Pedes- trian Volume Model. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 2675, no. 6 (June 2021): pp. 352–368. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361198121992360.

References 45 20. Le, M., S. R. Geedipally, K. Fitzpatrick, and R. E. Avelar. Estimating Pedestrian Volumes for Signalized and Stop-Controlled Intersections. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 2674, no. 9 (September 2020): pp. 799–808. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361198120932161. 21. Geedipally, S. R. Estimating Pedestrian Crossing Volumes and Crashes at Midblock Locations. Transporta- tion Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 2676, no. 8 (April 2022): pp. 648–656. https://doi.org/10.1177/03611981221084676. 22. Xiaofeng L., P. Xu, and Y. J. Wu. Pedestrian Crossing Volume Estimation at Signalized Intersections Using Bayesian Additive Regression Trees. Journal of Intelligent Transportation Systems 26, no. 5 (2022): pp. 557–571. https://doi.org/10.1080/15472450.2021.1933471. 23. Singleton, P. A., and F. Runa. Pedestrian Traffic Signal Data Accurately Estimates Pedestrian Crossing Volumes. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 2675, no. 6 (March 2021): pp. 429–440. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361198121994126. 24. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (2010). Highway Safety Manual. Vol. 2. Washington, DC. 25. Blackburn, L., C. Zegeer, and K. Brookshire. Guide for Improving Pedestrian Safety at Uncontrolled Crossing Locations. FHWA-SA-17-072. FHWA, 2018. https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/ped_bike/step/resources/docs/ fhwasa18018.pdf. 26. Los Angeles GeoHub. Traffic Data—Segments. https://geohub.lacity.org/datasets/traffic-counts/explore? location=34.153160%2C-118.480429%2C14.47. Accessed December 8, 2021. 27. Los Angeles GeoHub. Traffic Data—Intersections. https://geohub.lacity.org/datasets/traffic-data/explore? location=34.042619%2C-118.744248%2C10.24. Accessed December 8, 2021. 28. Los Angeles. Navigate LA. https://navigatela.lacity.org/navigatela/. Accessed December 8, 2021. 29. City of Long Beach. Engineering Bureau Traffic Engineering Division 2014 Citywide Traffic Flow. https:// www.longbeach.gov/globalassets/pw/media-library/documents/resources/general/maps-and-gis/2014- citywide-traffic-flow. Accessed December 8, 2021. 30. San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency. SFMTA Traffic Count Data 2014–2018. https://www. sfmta.com/reports/sfmta-traffic-count-data. Accessed December 8, 2021. 31. San Jose. Average Daily Traffic. https://data.sanjoseca.gov/dataset/average-daily-traffic. Accessed July 13, 2022. 32. Fitzpatrick, K., R. Avelar, M. P. Pratt, S. Das, and D. Lord. Crash Modification Factor for Corner Radius, Right-Turn Speed, and Prediction of Pedestrian Crashes at Signalized Intersections. FHWA-HRT-21-105. FHWA, 2022. 33. Zegeer, C., C. Lyon, R. Srinivasan, B. Persaud, B. Lan, S. Smith, D. Carter, N. J. Thirsk, J. Zegeer, E. Ferguson, R. Van Houten, and C. Sundstrom. Development of Crash Modification Factors for Uncontrolled Pedestrian Crossing Treatments. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 2636, no. 1 (January 2017): pp. 1–8. https://doi.org/10.3141/2636-01. 34. Schrank, D., B. Eisele, and T. Lomax. 2019 Urban Mobility Report, Appendix A: Methodology. https://static. tti.tamu.edu/tti.tamu.edu/documents/mobility-report-2021-appx-a.pdf. Accessed July 13, 2022. 35. City of San Jose. https://gisdata-csj.opendata.arcgis.com/search?collection=Dataset. Accessed December 21, 2020. 36. DataSF. https://datasf.org/opendata/. Accessed December 21, 2020. 37. County of Los Angeles. Open Data. https://data.lacounty.gov/. Accessed December 21, 2020. 38. LACMTA. Los Angeles Transit Stops, April 2020. https://la-metro.maps.arcgis.com/apps/Minimalist/index. html?appid=1fd006edf4cc446cad245c72241afba5. Accessed December 21, 2020. 39. Los Angeles Metro. https://developer.metro.net/gis-data/. Accessed December 21, 2020. 40. County of Long Beach. https://datalb.longbeach.gov/. Accessed December 21, 2020 41. Texas Department of Transportation. Texas—TPP. https://txdot.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/ index.html?id=06fea0307dda42c1976194bf5a98b3a1. Accessed December 8, 2021. 42. Geedipally, S., M. Pratt, M. Ko, and K. Womack. Developing a Crash Analysis Tool to Address Pedestrian Safety. Austin, TX: TDOT, 2016. 43. Utah Department of Transportation. UDOT Data Portal. https://data-uplan.opendata.arcgis.com/. Accessed July 13, 2022. 44. ArcGIS. Estimated Pedestrian Volumes at Signalized Intersections (1,494) in Utah. https://www.arcgis.com/ apps/mapviewer/index.html?webmap=57b2a38e07e4446ab86efd4a257e3eff. Accessed December 8, 2021. 45. ArcGIS. Predicted Pedestrian Volumes at Intersections (62k) in Utah. https://www.arcgis.com/apps/ mapviewer/index.html?webmap=32af57787d864a7996af76d0d9055cb2. Accessed December 8, 2021. 46. Avelar, R. E., K. K. Dixon, and P. Escobar. Evaluation of Signalized-Intersection Crash Screening Methods Based on Distance from Intersection. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 2514, no. 1 (January 2015): pp. 177–186. https://doi.org/10.3141/2514-19. 47. Lord, D., X. Qin, S. R. Geedipally. Highway Safety Analytics and Modeling. Amsterdam: Elsevier Publishing Ltd., 2021.

Abbreviations and acronyms used without definitions in TRB publications: A4A Airlines for America AAAE American Association of Airport Executives AASHO American Association of State Highway Ocials AASHTO American Association of State Highway and Transportation Ocials ACI–NA Airports Council International–North America ACRP Airport Cooperative Research Program ADA Americans with Disabilities Act APTA American Public Transportation Association ASCE American Society of Civil Engineers ASME American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials ATA American Trucking Associations CTAA Community Transportation Association of America CTBSSP Commercial Truck and Bus Safety Synthesis Program DHS Department of Homeland Security DOE Department of Energy EPA Environmental Protection Agency FAA Federal Aviation Administration FAST Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act (2015) FHWA Federal Highway Administration FMCSA Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration FRA Federal Railroad Administration FTA Federal Transit Administration GHSA Governors Highway Safety Association HMCRP Hazardous Materials Cooperative Research Program IEEE Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers ISTEA Intermodal Surface Transportation Eciency Act of 1991 ITE Institute of Transportation Engineers MAP-21 Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (2012) NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration NASAO National Association of State Aviation Ocials NCFRP National Cooperative Freight Research Program NCHRP National Cooperative Highway Research Program NHTSA National Highway Trac Safety Administration NTSB National Transportation Safety Board PHMSA Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration RITA Research and Innovative Technology Administration SAE Society of Automotive Engineers SAFETEA-LU Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Ecient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (2005) TCRP Transit Cooperative Research Program TEA-21 Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (1998) TRB Transportation Research Board TSA Transportation Security Administration U.S. DOT United States Department of Transportation

Transportation Research Board 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED ISBN 978-0-309-68770-6 9 7 8 0 3 0 9 6 8 7 7 0 6 9 0 0 0 0

Safety at Midblock Pedestrian Signals Get This Book
×
 Safety at Midblock Pedestrian Signals
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

Midblock pedestrian signals (MPSs) provide safety benefits and support “complete streets,” a transportation policy and design approach that calls for roadways to be designed and operated with all users in mind: bicyclists, public transportation users, drivers, and pedestrians of all ages and abilities.

The TRB National Cooperative Highway Research Program's NCHRP Research Report 1030: Safety at Midblock Pedestrian Signals presents a state-of-the-practice guide to midblock pedestrian crossing treatments, summarizes the safety effectiveness of MPS installations, and proposes language for consideration in future updates to the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) for MPSs.

Supplemental to the report is a Memo on Implementation of the Research Findings. A PDF file with alt text descriptions for the graphics is available upon request from Customer_Service@nap.edu.

READ FREE 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!