Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Type of Crosswalk <br /> <br />Crosswalks usually had standard markings (two parallel white lines). Various types of crosswalk <br />markings are illustrated in figure 7 (shown in chapter 2). <br /> <br />The presence of any signs or beacons was also noted. Types of signs and beacons included: <br /> <br />Advanced Crosswalk Sign: Mounted in advance of the crosswalk, to warn drivers that they are <br />approaching a crosswalk. <br />Crosswalk Sign: Placed at the crosswalk. <br />Overhead Sign: An overhead pedestrian warning sign (in advance or at the crosswalk). <br />Flash: A flashing beacon placed next to the crosswalk. <br />Overhead Flash: A flashing beacon placed over the crosswalk. <br /> <br />Only 19 of the 2,000 sites (less than 1 percent) had any of these supplemental devices. Sites were <br />selected to minimize the number of signs or beacons. <br /> <br />Condition of Crosswalk Markings <br /> <br />The condition of the marked crosswalk was recorded as excellent (E), good (G), fair (F), or poor (P). <br />There was no way to determine the condition of the markings over the entire study period. <br /> <br />Area Type <br /> <br />Each crosswalk was in a central business district (CBD), fringe, or residential area. <br /> <br />CBD: CBDs are downtown areas and are characterized by moderate to heavy pedestrian <br />volumes, lower vehicle speeds, and dense commercial activity. <br />Fringe: Fringe areas include suburban and commercial retail activity areas, and typically have <br />moderate pedestrian volumes. These areas may also include high-rise apartments. <br />Residential: Residential development would generally correspond to lower pedestrian volumes. <br /> <br />Of the 2,000 marked and unmarked crosswalks that were used in the analysis, 199 (10 percent) were in a <br />CBD, 1,093 (54.7 percent) were in fringe areas, and 708 (35.4 percent) were in residential areas. <br /> <br />Estimated Pedestrian ADT <br /> <br />For each crosswalk and control site, the pedestrian ADT was based on expanding short-term pedestrian <br />counts based on adjustment factors, as described below. <br /> <br />Pedestrians and motorists are out and about at all hours of the day and night. As a result, pedestrian <br />crashes may happen at any hour. Therefore, to calculate crash rates, 24-hour daily pedestrian volumes are <br />needed. It was not feasible to count pedestrians for every hour at each of the 1,000 marked crosswalks <br />and 1,000 unmarked comparison sites. Instead, pedestrians were counted by 15-minute intervals for a <br />total of 1 hour at each site. These counts were conducted on weekdays during daylight hours. The <br />earliest count intervals started at 7 a.m., and the latest count intervals ended at 6 p.m. <br /> <br />Daily pedestrian volumes at each marked crosswalk and unmarked comparison site were then estimated <br />from these 1-hour counts. If pedestrian activity were evenly distributed in each hour of the day, then each <br />hour would comprise about 4.2 percent (100 percent ) 24 hours) of the daily total. The 1-hour count <br />66