Laserfiche WebLink
7 <br />▪ Distance to Next Controlled Crossing: The distance (in feet) between the closest controlled <br />crossing (i.e., traffic/pedestrian signal, all-way stop, PHB, or RRFB) and the crossing under <br />review. <br />▪ Two-stage Crossing Distance: Total distance to cross (in feet) on either side of the <br />pedestrian refuge island. <br />▪ Total Crossing Distance: The total crossing distance (in feet) to complete the roadway <br />crossing from curb ramp to curb ramp or curb face to curb face if curb ramps are not <br />present. <br />3. EVALUATE CANDIDATE LOCATIONS <br />Once data collection is complete, the candidate crossing location should be evaluated using the <br />flowchart. Starting at the top, proceed through each criteria box following the path of whether the <br />data meets that criterion. Progress through the flowchart until reaching one of three boxes at the <br />bottom which include: <br />▪ No Action Recommended: The crossing location does not meet one or more criteria and is <br />not recommended. Directing users to the nearest marked crosswalk should be considered <br />to reduce risk taking behavior. The nearest marked crosswalk should be consistent with the <br />guidelines defined in this evaluation process or approved following staff review and <br />engineering judgement. <br />▪ Consider an Unmarked Crossing: An “unmarked crossing” is any treatment that improves a <br />person’s ability to cross a roadway, short of a marked crosswalk with signage or other <br />enhancements detailed in Step 3 at the crossing location. Installation of this type of <br />crossing is subject to staff review and engineering judgement and must include ADA- <br />compliant curb ramps, appropriate pedestrian warning signage in advance of the crossing, <br />and roadway geometric improvements if applicable (list of options found below in step 3, <br />the engineering review process). No markings or additional signage beyond pedestrian <br />warning signage are provided to attract or recommend that nonmotorized users cross at <br />the location. The crossing is intended to operate as an improvement for a low volume <br />pedestrian crossing where nonmotorized users are already crossing and will continue to <br />cross at this location or to provide consistency where enhancements are not warranted. <br />▪ Consideration of a Crossing Enhancement is Appropriate: The crossing location is <br />appropriate for consideration of infrastructure enhancements. Proceed to the engineering <br />review process to complete context-specific analysis, staff review, and engineering <br />judgement.