uncontrolled crossings national task force survey

8/10/2019 Uncontrolled Crossings National Task Force Survey

1/8

Current Practices Survey

Ma rc h 2014

Uncontrolled Crossings National Task Force

Andy Hamilton, County of San Diego/CirculateSanDiego/America Walks, Ch

Dana Dickman, Alta Planning and Design, Portland, OR

Jeff Riegner, Whitman, Requardt & Associates/ITE Pedestrian & Bicycle Council

Joe Fish, Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Commission

Julio Fuentes, City of San Diego

K.C. Yellapu, Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers, San Diego

Mike Cynecki, Lee Engineering, Phoenix

Rock Miller, Stantec/ITE International President

Uncontrolled Crossings Task Force

GrGrGrGrGrGG apapapapppphihihihihh cccc DeDeDeDeesisisisis gngngngngn bbbbbyyyyy LiLiLiLinsnsnsnsnsn cocococococoottttttttttt ,, LaLaLaLaawwwwww &&& GrGGG eeeensnsnsnsn pappapapapan,n,nn, EEEEngngggnginini eeeeeeersrsrsrs


2/8

1

Introduction

Americansare increasinglyembracingwalking fortransportationandrecreation,but feelsafe

placestowalkarelackinginmostjurisdictions. ThemajorityofU.S.pedestrianfatalitiesoccur

onurbanarterialroadways,andamajorityoftheseareoutsideofcrosswalks.i Thisisdue,at

least in part, to the lack of safe crossing opportunities between widely spaced signalized

intersections.

As

a

result,

pedestrians

frequently

take

great

risks

crossing,

forego

crossing

altogether,orifacarisavailable,opttodrive,addingtolocalVehicleMilesTravelled(VMT)and

reducingbothphysicalandeconomicactivity.

Anecdotal evidence suggests local crosswalk installation practices are extremely variable.

Guidance is lacking for evaluating crossing locations and selecting crossing treatments at

unsignalized intersectionsofmajorstreets. Manyagencieshaverelied,andsomecontinueto

rely,ona1972SanDiegostudy(Herms)iithatseemedtoshowmarkingcrosswalksmayincrease

pedestriancollisions. In2002,theFederalHighwayAdministrationsponsoredananalysisof1000

uncontrolledmarkedcrosswalksmatchedwith1000unmarkedcrosswalksitesin30cities. The

resultwas

aguidance

indicating

under

what

conditions

marking

crosswalks

alone

(without

other

enhancements) isacceptable.iii Theguidancefactorsarenumberoflanes,trafficvolume,and

presenceorabsenceofaraisedmedian. In2009,thisguidancewasadoptedintotheManualon

UniformTrafficControlDevices(MUTCD).

Itisimportanttonotethatmostcrosswalkstudieshavefocusedoncrashreductionrisk. There

has been relatively little attention paid to the demand side, i.e., whether new crosswalk

treatments contribute positively to walkability, inducing more crossing and perhaps more

walkingtrips. Thelackofsafecrossingopportunitiesmaystiflepedestriancrossingandactivity,

andcontributetotheobesityepidemicplaguingoursociety.

About

This

Project

TheUncontrolledCrossingsTaskForceisavolunteergroupofprofessionalsrepresentingAmerica

Walks, the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), and the Association of Pedestrian and

Bicycle Professionals (APBP), interested in gathering information to support a better

understanding of current local crosswalk implementation practices, and making

recommendationsfordevelopingnationalguidelines. Tothisend,theTaskForceconducteda

shortsurveyinApril2013,collecting105completeresponses. Theresultsarepresentedinthis

document. Conclusions and next steps are provided on the last page. Questions or

correspondence regarding this project may be directed to Andy Hamilton

([email protected];8585862641).


3/8

2

BestPracticeGuidance

Afuturephaseofthisprojectwillrecommendbestpracticeresourcesforevaluatingandtreating

uncontrolledlocations. Inthemeantime,readersshouldfindthefollowingresourceshelpful:

PEDSAFE2013CountermeasureSelectionTool

http://www.pedbikesafe.org/pedsafe/selectiontool.cfm

CityofSacramentoPedestrianSafetyGuidelines(2013)

http://www.cityofsacramento.org/transportation/dot_media/engineer_media/pdf/PedSafe

ty.pdf

CityofBoulderPedestrianCrossingTreatmentInstallationGuidelines(2011)

https://bouldercolorado.gov/transportation/pedestriancrossingtreatments

CostsforPedestrianandBicycleImprovements(2013)

www.walkinginfo.org/library/details.cfm?id=4876


4/8

3

SurveyResults

1.Whatjurisdictiondoyourepresentorworkwith?(105Responses)

2.Whichtreatmentsareyoucurrentlyusingatuncontrolledmajorstreetlocations?

(114Responses)

31.6%

36 26.3%30

29.8%

34

37.7%

43

62.3%

71 57.9%

66

21.1%

24

71.1%

81

43.9%

50

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

1.

Advance

Stop

Markings

2.AdvanceYieldMarkings

3.HighIntensityActivated

Crosswalk/PedestrianHybridBeacon

4.RectangularRapidFlashBeacon

5.MedianIslands/PedestrianRefuge

Areas

6.CurbExtensions

7.InPavementWarningLights

8.HighVisibilityCrosswalkMarkings

9.MountedInRoadSign

Treatments

West18%

California16%

Midwest11%

Southwest16%Southeast17%

Northeast22%

Canada

5%

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9


5/8

4

3.Whichofthefollowingdatahaveyoucollected?(46Responses)

4a. Other than the MUTCD, does your

jurisdictionhavewrittenpolicies/guidelinesfor

applying marked crosswalks at uncontrolled

locations?(104responses)

4b. If your agency has its own policy, when was it

adopted?(24Responses)

5

16

2

39

23

41

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

PedestrianVolumes MotoristYield/StopRates PedestrianCrashes

No,Ihavenotcollectedthisdata Yes,Ihavecollectedthisdata

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Numberof

Responses

YearAdopted

12 20102013

8 20032009

4 19912002

Yes

33%

No

67%34Responses

70Responses


6/8

5

5a.Isyouragencyinneedofimprovedguidancefortheinstallationofpedestriancrossingtreatmentsat

uncontrolledlocations?(96responses)

5b.Ifadditionalguidanceisneeded,inwhatareasismoreguidancedesirable?(40Responses)

12.5%

12

32.3%

31

24.0%

2318.8%

18

12.5%

12

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

Yes

Considerable

GuidanceIs

Desired

Yes

SomeGuidance

IsDesired

No

ExistingGuidance

IsAcceptable

No

ThisIsNotA

MajorIssueFor

OurAgency

I'mNot

Sure

Or

Don'tKnow

47.5%

1942.5%

17

12.5%

5

5.0%

2

5.0%

2

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

WhenToInstallA

Crosswalk

WhatTreatment

ToApply

Expected

EffectivenessOf

Treatments

Anticipated

LiabilityExposure

Communication

WithMotorists&

TheCommunity


7/8

6

6.Ifyouragencyhasitsownpolicy,whichofthefollowingfactorsareconsideredinyourcrosswalk

installationguidelines?(29responses)

7.Doesyouragencyhaveadequatetrainingandstaffingtoassessuncontrolledcrossingslocationsand

installappropriatetreatments?(75Responses)

82.8%

24 79.3%

23

82.8%

2472.4%

21

48.3%

14

65.5%

19

79.3%

23

65.5%

19

44.8%

13

75.9%

22

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%1.PedestrianVolume

2.Traffic

Volume

3.Speed

4.NumberOfLanes

5.MultipleThreatPotential

6.CrashHistory

7.IntersectionVersusMidblock

8.DistanceToNearestSignal

9.VehicularGapsAvailable

10.SightDistance

32.0%

24

76.0%

57

41.3%

31

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Morestaff/resources

neededforassessmentof

uncontrolledcrossings

Morefinancialresources

neededforinstallationof

treatments

Moretrainingneededfor

assessment,prioritization

andselection

of

crossing

treatments

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10


8/8

7

Conclusions

The survey confirmed there is no uniform approach to evaluating or providing crossing

opportunitiesonuncontrolledlocationsalongmajorstreets. Itislikelythatrespondentsarea

selfselectedgroup,alreadyworkingtoimprovewalkingconditionsintheirlocaljurisdictionor

state. Despitethis,51percentofthosewhoexpressedanopinionindicatedaneedforgreater

guidance

evaluating

potential

crossing

locations

and

selecting

treatments.

Over

40

percent

indicatedtheywouldlikemorestafftrainingforassessingandselectingpotentialcrossings.

NextSteps

Thenextstepsinthisprojectareasfollows:

1. IdentifyandsummarizebestpracticesamongU.S.jurisdictions.

2. Recommend best practice approaches that mostjurisdictions should feel comfortable

adoptinggiventhecurrentstateofknowledge.

3.

Followupwithsurveyrespondentsandotherstogatheravailabledataontheeffectof

crosswalktreatmentsonpedestriancrossingdemand. (PleasecontactAndyHamiltonif

yourjurisdiction

has

before

and

after

pedestrian

volume

data

at

aparticular

crosswalk

installation.)

4. Wherefurtherresearchisneeded,craftresearchneedstatementstobeforwardedtothe

TransportationResearchBoardsPedestrianCommittee.

AboutAmericaWalks

www.americawalks.org

AmericaWalksisanonprofitorganizationwhosemissionistomakeAmericaagreatplacefor

walkingbyworkingcollaborativelytoshareknowledge,advancepoliciesandimplementeffective

campaignstopromotesafe,convenientandaccessiblewalkingconditionsforall. AmericaWalks

leads

a

diverse

coalition

of

national

organizations,

state

partners,

and

local

advocacy

groups

dedicatedtoachievingandpromotingwalkablecommunities.

AboutAPBP

www.apbp.org

TheAssociationofPedestrianandBicycleProfessionals(APBP)workstogrowthepedestrianand

bicycle profession and its influence by facilitating the exchange of professional and technical

knowledge,elevatingpractitionersskillsanddefiningthefield. Theorganizationhasgrownto

include1,200membersintheUnitedStatesandCanada. APBPmembersworkatalllevelsof

government,in

manufacturing,

and

as

consultants,

advocates,

researchers,

and

students

in

awide range of disciplines: transportation planning and engineering, urban design, landscape

architecture,publichealth,activeliving,andSafeRoutestoSchool.

iTransportationforAmerica,DangerousbyDesign,2011.

iiHerms,B.PedestrianCrosswalkStudy:CrashesinPaintedandUnpaintedCrosswalks.RecordNo.406,TransportationResearchBoard,

NationalResearchCouncil,Washington,D.D.,1972iiiZegeer,C.,Stewart,J.,Huang,H.,Lagerwey,P.SafetyEffectsofMarkedversusUnmarkedCrosswalksatUncontrolledLocations:Analysisof

PedestrianCrashesin30Cities. InTransportationResearchRecord:JournaloftheTransportationResearchRecord,No.1773,Part2:Bicycleand

PedestrianResearch,paperNo.010505,TRB,NationalResearchCouncil,Washington,D.C.,2001,pp.5668.

uncontrolled crossings national task force survey

Documents